THIS NEW YORK DAILY NEWS PIECE WAS PRETTY CLOSE TO A DISASTER FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Well, not really. But it might surprise you that Hillary Clinton did in fact meet with the NY Daily News Editorial Board on April 9th. And the reason it might surprise you is that unlike the Bernie Sanders interview, it didn't generate a great deal of discussion. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-hillary-clinton-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2596292 In case you didn't know, the NY Daily News are huge Clinton supporters who've aggressively endorsed her run for the Democratic Nomination. Recently, they subjected dear old Bernie to a hostile interrogation that the mainstream media pounced on to perpetuate the narrative he doesn't know what he's talking about. This narrative has since been debunked by likes of the New York Times, The Huffington Post and the Young Turks as a 'hit piece' where not only did the interviewers not know what THEY were talking about, but they were using Bernie's own legislation to discuss the very policy he apparently doesn't know anything about. If he sounded confused, it was because he was....by their questions! But instead of a heavy barrage of factually inaccurate and deliberately confusing line of questioning, the Daily News predictably softballed Hillary on the issue of 'breaking up the big banks.' ---------------------- Daily News: Wall Street, too big to fail. Clinton: Too big to fail. Daily News: How do you stop too big to fail? What needs to happen? Clinton: Well, I have been a strong supporter of Dodd-Frank because it is the most consequential financial reforms since the Great Depression. And I have said many times in debates and in other settings, there is authority in Dodd-Frank to break up banks that pose a grave threat to financial stability. There are two approaches. There's Section 121, Section 165, and both of them can be used by regulators to either require a bank to sell off businesses, lines of businesses or assets, because of the finding that is made by two-thirds of the financial regulators that the institution poses a grave threat, or if the Fed and the FDIC conclude that the institutions' living will resolution is inadequate and is not going to get any better, there can also be requirements that they do so. So we've got that structure. Now a lot of people have argued that there need to be some tweaks to it that I would be certainly open to. But my point from the very beginning of this campaign, and it's something that I've said repeatedly: big banks did not cause the Great Recession primarily. They were complicit, but hedge funds; Lehman Brothers, an investment bank; a big insurance company, AIG; mortgage companies like Countrywide, Fannie and Freddie — there were lots of culprits who were contributing to the circumstances that led to the very dangerous financial crisis. ---------------------- In other words, Clinton will do NOTHING to break up the big banks. So if you vote for Clinton for President, don't come crying to us when they inevitably push through another bailout. But while the NY Daily News have actively endorsed her run, not everyone at the tabloid shares their enthusiasm for the Wall Street funded candidate: Shaun King: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election/king-disagree-news-endorsing-hillary-clinton-article-1.2599208 Linda Stasi http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/stasi-hillary-clinton-talks-lot-article-1.2594740 Juan Gonzalez: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/gonzalez-clinton-policy-latin-american-crime-story-article-1.2598456