Name: 'How about a counter-argument based on fact?': Elizabeth Warren destroys CNBC host over two-cent wealth tax criticism
Brand: rawstory.com
SKU: rawstory-com-13
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

'How about a counter-argument based on fact?': Elizabeth Warren destroys CNBC host over two-cent wealth tax criticism

preview

--Sen. Elizabeth Warren, photo by Gage Skidmore."There is no evidence that anyone is going to leave this country because of a."That's the two cents Sen. Elizabeth Warren shared on Thursday in response toCNBC host Sara Eisen's fear-mongering about the alleged consequences of requiring the super-rich to pay their fair share in taxes.After Eisenthat a wealth tax "might... chase wealthy people out of this country as we've seen has happened with...other wealth taxes," the Democratic senator from Massachusetts asked: "Can we just keep in mind, right now, in America, who's paying taxes?""You know the bottom 99% last year paid about 7.5% of their total wealth in taxes," said Warren. "The top 0.001%, you know how much they paid? They paid about 3.2%.""If they added a two-cent wealth tax," Warren noted, "they'd still be paying less than most of the people in this entire nation... Someone has to pay to keep this nation going. And right now, what the 0.001%, the wealthiest people in this country, have said is: 'Let's let everyone else pay for it.'"The reason for that, Warren explained, is because the mega-rich want to continue to increase their wealth as much and as quickly as possible."Can we have just a little fairness here?" the senator pleaded.After Eisen chimed in to say she was simply playing devil's advocate, Warren retorted: "How about a counter-argument... that's based on fact?"The fact is, Warren said, "The wealthiest in this country are paying less in taxes than everyone else.""You're telling me that they would forfeit their American citizenship if they had to... step up and pay a little more?" the senator asked. "I'm just calling your bluff on that. That's not going to happen."Warren's defense of a wealth tax comes as the has provoked renewed scrutiny of Wall Street's role in intensifying inequality, leading to calls for greater and redistributive policies such as a .In her appearance on CNBC, Warren pointed out the stark disconnect between the stock market and the real economy. The apparent rigging of the rules to favor hedge funds over ordinary people has been exposed not only by trading app Robinhood's heavy-handed and on Redditors who tried to out-maneuver the masters of casino capitalism, but also by the fact that since mid-March 2020, in the midst of immense working-class suffering.While millions of U.S. households have been devastated by the Covid-19 pandemic and ensuing economic meltdown, "the stock market, which has become the giant casino and the playground for the billionaires, just keeps spinning upward," said Warren.Echoing Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who on Thursday a billionaire investor for complaining about the prospect of the uber-wealthy having to pay their fair share in taxes while millions go hungry, Warren commented on the "K-shaped" nature of the anemic recovery."The people at the top are getting richer and richer and richer," Warren said. "And people who make less than $40,000 a year are now suffering through 20% unemployment. They're getting poorer and poorer and poorer."Chastising Republicans for their refusal to deploy adequate funding for vaccine distribution, nutrition assistance, and the safe re-opening of child care centers and schools, Warren added that the coronavirus crisis could accelerate wealth inequality "at a rate that we had never even imagined in our worst nightmares."Warren continued: "Tens of millions of people across this country are out of work. Tens of millions more are on the threshold of losing either their homes or their apartments. Tens of millions more have depleted their savings and don't have enough money to put food on the table.""That is a core part of the American economy," Warren added, "and that's where Congress needs to respond and we need to respond quickly and forcefully."Report typos and corrections to: .It shouldn't be a surprise that corruption was running rampant throughout the government of Donald Trump. The last six years have been filled with stories about ethics problems by Cabinet officials, political retaliation, self-protection, political promotion and more. Washington Post reporter with Trump's scandals, saying, "this is a person that has crossed so many lines: legal, ethical, moral, every line you can imagine, presidential norms be damned. Every single things we can think of."Another scandal was revealed with the publication of Geoffrey Berman's book, scheduled to be released on Tuesday. Already, the Senate Judiciary Committee chair, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), has announced that they will hold a hearing to investigate the allegations outlined in the book and specifically cited the cases Berman says Attorney General Bill Barr and Donald Trump interfered with. Attorney General Merrick Garland's spokesperson, Anthony Coley, confirmed receipt of Durbin's letter and declined to comment further. Berman has already stated that he’ll “be happy to cooperate with any congressional inquiry”Lawyer and commentator that the Senate better move quickly.RELATED: Reacting to the news Monday evening, former US Attorney Glenn Kirschner said outright that it was time to . "As a former career DOJ prosecutor, Bill Barr’s corruption/weaponization of DOJ to protect Trump and persecute Trump’s critics make me want to f’ing scream!" . "This abuse by Barr et al. must be addressed."Ethics czar for George W. Bush, Richard Painter, spoke to the intervention of Trump attempting to stop further investigations into possible secret political spending for hush money payments. "U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman was fired because his investigations got too close to Trump. A president may NOT remove a federal officer in order to obstruct justice. That's a crime and should be charged as such," wondered if it was the reason that Barr has been playing as if he's a "real lawyer" in Trump's stolen documents scandal. "Because he knew Berman’s book wld further confirm Barr’s disgraceful conduct as AG?" she asked. "Still, needed to hear this and Berman revelations re: targeted DOJ investigations before now.Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen has long said that he was disproportionately targeted by the Justice Department and the Department of Corrections after it became clear he would no longer cover for his former client.Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey Berman, has spoken to Congress, and publicly after he was shoved out of the , after refusing to go after allegedly innocent people tied to former President Barack Obama. But another foe of Trump ultimately became Cohen.scheduled to be released on Tuesday, alleges that the SDNY was going after Cohen even after Cohen agreed to plead guilty. While Cohen has pleaded guilty to nebulous tax charges, he maintains that the crimes cited in his plea he was innocent of. "When Bill Barr took over as U.S. Attorney General, in February 2019, six months after Cohen's guilty plea, he not only tried to kill the ongoing investigations we were engaged in, but incredibly, he suggested that Cohen's conviction on campaign finance charges should be reversed," Berman wrote in the book. "Barr summoned my deputy who was overseeing the Cohen case, in late February to challenge the basis of Cohen's plea as well as the reasoning behind pursuing similar campaign finance charges against other individuals. He was told to cease all investigative work on the campaign finance allegations until main Justice determined there was a legal basis for the campaign finance charges to which Cohen pled guilty and until Barr determined there was a sufficient federal interest in pursuing charges against others."They are allegations that Cohen Revenge: How Donald Trump Weaponized the Department of Justice Against his Critics, scheduled to be published Oct. 11, 2022. An excerpt of the book shared with Raw Story, cites Berman, saying that the DOJ and SDNY are all supposed to act independently. "Which is why Trump attempted to get Geoffrey Berman, the head of the criminal division, to resign; which he refused," the book excerpt explains. "The question needing to be asked is: why would the president of the United States be so focused on this one facet of the Justice Department other than for the reason that it was the court prosecuting my case? The answer is he wouldn't." Berman recused himself from Cohen's case, but Trump said that it wasn't enough, Cohen's book details. "Since Trump appointed Berman to his possession he believed that Berman owed him loyalty, which included acquiescing to Trump's desire to silence me through incarceration." Even after Cohen was sent to prison to serve his sentence, he was given a house arrest option due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a non-violent offender, he could be on an ankle monitor and serve out his sentence from there. that if he was under house arrest he could not speak out, write a book or do any interviews. Cohen refused and took them to court saying it was a . He won and ultimately spent his time speaking out on everything that he knows about Trump. Speaking to Raw Story, Cohen said that Berman's book "validates what I have been continuously saying as well as the premise of my upcoming book Revenge. Berman's failure to disclose what was occurring under his watch as head of the SDNY is at the least unethical and the most illegal. Berman needs to be questioned, indicted and prosecuted for his behavior; or lack thereof."Berman explained, "the directive Bill Barr gave my deputy, which was amplified that same day by a follow-up call from Edward O'Callaghan, that was explicit. Not a single investigative step could be taken, not a single document in our possession could be reviewed. And if main Justice decided in the end that there was no legal basis for the charges, well, the attorney general of the United States would then direct us to dismiss the campaign finance guilty pleas of Michael Cohen, the man who implicated the attorney general's boss, the president."The campaign finance charges were legitimate ones according to experts, but they would normally have been applied to the campaign and/or the candidate. "Barr's posture here raises obvious questions," Berman said. "Did he think dropping the campaign finance charges would bolster Trump's defense against impeachment charges? Was he trying to ensure no other Trump associates or employees would be charged with making hush money payments or perhaps flip on the president? Was the goal to ensure that the president could not be charged after leaving office? Was it part of an effort to undo the entire series of investigations and prosecutions over the past two years of those in the president's orbit? Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn?"The book then goes on to detail that the prosecution of Cohen and former Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) prompted the DOJ to order that former for a crime he never committed. He was ultimately acquitted, but only after paying for a legal defense and having his name dragged through right-wing news sites. Trump's Justice Department directed the SDNY not only to reevaluate the basis of Cohen's plea and they wanted SDNY to stop investigating anybody involved in those crimes committed by the Trump campaign to try to cover up evidence of alleged affairs, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow explained. "SDNY also was contacted by Trump's Justice Department, senior officials, and they were told that they needed to get rid of all mentions of 'Individual-1' in the Michael Cohen indictment. SDNY said no to that, they resisted. But SDNY officials did take out of the Michael Cohen related court filings the most direct language they had in those filings saying what role Trump played in those crimes."As Berman described it, the information was being finalized after Cohen agreed to plead guilty. The documents were about 40 pages long and identified Individual-1 as acting in concert with Cohen. It was obvious that it was Trump, but Edward O'Callaghan called Robert Kuzami demanding to know why the indictment was so long and detailed."He argued that now that Cohen was pleading guilty," the book says. "'We don't need all this description,' he responded. 'What exactly are you concerned about?' O'Callaghan proceeded to identify specific allegations he wanted to be removed, almost all of which referenced Individual-1. Donald Trump. It quickly became apparent that contrary to what O'Callaghan professed, it wasn't the length or the detail of the document that concerned him. It was any mention of Individual-. Khuzami and O'Callaghan went through a handful of these allegations, some of which he agreed to strike, others he did not. Sensing this was going to be a long process, he told O'Callaghan he was now aware of his concerns and the team would remove certain nonessential details." The book continues: "They stayed up most of the night. The revised information in Cohen's case was now 21 pages, down from 40. It removed certain allegations, including allegations that Individual-1 acted in concert with and coordinated with Cohen on the illegal campaign contributions. The information now alleged that Cohen acted in concert and coordinated with, quote, one or more members of the campaign. So, Individual-1, Donald Trump... 'he did this stuff with Donald Trump' becomes 'he did this stuff with someone from the campaign.' The specific mentions of Cohen committing this crime, this federal felony in concert with and coordinating with Trump in the commission of the crime, those specific references were taken out of this court filing to not mention Trump specifically. And the investigators on that case were also directed by main Justice that they needed to stop investigating anybody other than Michael Cohen for these crimes."that the Senate Judiciary Committee would be holding an investigation on the details in the book. They'll specifically seek documents involving Cohen, the John Kerry case and former Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig's case.U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) will lead Senate Republicans in a push to pass a nationwide ban on abortion in a press conference Tuesday, less than two months before the November midterms, according to multiple reports.Despite wording in an apparent press release calling it a "late-term" abortion ban, The Washington Post's Caroline Kitchener at or after 15 weeks."Tomorrow, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, and pro-life women leaders will join Senator Lindsey Graham(R-SC) at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol for the introduction of the Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act," the press release from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America reads.Medical experts are clear that .The move to impose a nationwide abortion ban barely into the second trimester comes less than three months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, the nearly 50-year old landmark decision that said there is a constitutional right to abortion. Justices and Republicans insisted it was a states' rights issue, but with this push to ban abortion before some women even know they're pregnant it's clear the states' rights claim was a smokescreen.Politico's also reported on the expected announcement by Sen. Graham.The Supreme Court's decision in the Dobbs case, rescinding the civil right to abortion, and the Democrats' promise to make the right to abortion a federal law, along with President Biden's historic legislative successes, have moved projected control of the Senate back to the Democrats.The South Carolina Post and Courier's Caitlin Byrd , "At a DNC fundraiser earlier tonight in Boston, Biden said: 'I want to codify Roe v Wade.'"This is a breaking news and developing story.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Copyright © 2022 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | | | For corrections or concerns, please email corrections@rawstory.com. | {{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}

--Sen. Elizabeth Warren, photo by Gage Skidmore."There is no evidence that anyone is going to leave this country because of a."That's the two cents Sen. Elizabeth Warren shared on Thursday in response toCNBC host Sara Eisen's fear-mongering about the alleged consequences of requiring the super-rich to pay their fair share in taxes.After Eisenthat a wealth tax "might... chase wealthy people out of this country as we've seen has happened with...other wealth taxes," the Democratic senator from Massachusetts asked: "Can we just keep in mind, right now, in America, who's paying taxes?""You know...

public

Common Dreams

The Raw Story (also stylized as RawStory) is an American online tabloid founded in 2004 by John K. Byrne. It covers current national and international political events and publishes its own editorials which tend to advocate for progressive positions. The Raw Story is a news site, bringing attention to stories that it sees as downplayed or ignored by other media outlets.

'How about a counter-argument based on fact?': Elizabeth Warren destroys CNBC host over two-cent wealth tax criticism

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS