Feeds: Email, RSS & Twitter

Get Our Videos By Email


8,300 Unique Visitors In The Past Day


Powered by Squarespace


Search The Archive Of 15,000 Videos




Hank Paulson Is A Criminal - Pass It On

"The Federal Reserve Is A Ponzi Scheme"

Get Our Videos By Email


Bernanke's Replacement: Happy Hour In Santa Cruz

Must See: National Debt Road Trip

"Of Course We're Not Going To  Payback the Chinese."

Dave Chappelle On White Collar Crime

Carlin: Wall Street Owns Washington

SLIDESHOW - Genius Signs From Irish IMF Protest

SLIDESHOW - Airport Security Cartoons - TSA

Most Recent Comments
Cartoons & Photos
« Elizabeth Warren, Republican Punching Bag (Video) | Main | J.P. Morgan, Other Banks Boost Dividends After Fed Tests »

Former Goldman Sachs Banker Behind WSJ Smear Campaign Against Elizabeth Warren 

Mary Kissel readies another attack against Warren.

Listen to Kissel attack Warren


By Zach Carter

Source - Huff Po

WASHINGTON -- A Wall Street Journal editorial writer who has been closely involved with the paper's recent attacks on Elizabeth Warren is a former Goldman Sachs banker. The same editorial writer, Mary Kissel, is readying another piece critical of Warren and the new consumer agency, according to a source familiar with the coming article.

Like most major newspapers, the Journal does not disclose the authors of its editorials. Kissel recently appeared on the John Batchelor radio show as a representative of the Journal's editorial board do discuss Warren, and repeated the main arguments used in the editorials.

The editorials paint both Warren and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as an immensely powerful, unaccountable organization. The nascent agency is assuming the consumer protection duties currently exercised by regulators at the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

The author, Mary Kissel, worked for Goldman between 1999 and 2002 as a fixed income research and capital markets specialist.

Kissel is listed on the Journal's website as a member of the editorial staff and her bio includes her time at Goldman Sachs and notes that she worked for the company in both New York and London.

On Wednesay, Warren testified before a House subcomittee, providing 34 pages of written answers while submitting to two-and-a-half hours of aggressive questioning from congressional Republicans, who deployed talking points similar to those used in the recent Journal editorials.

"There has definitely been an uptick in attacks on her and on the agency over the past few weeks, it's hard to imagine it hasn't been well-coordinated by somebody," said a source close to Warren. "The smear campaign by The Wall Street Journal's editorial board this week includes the most unfactual and outrageous hit pieces on her yet. If it's true that the author of the editorials and Goldman Sachs coordinated on them, they should both be exposed and called to account."

Continue reading...





PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (13)

"The principal feature of American libtardism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things–war and hunger and date rape–liberals testify to their own terrific goodness. More important, they promote themselves to membership in a self-selecting elite of those who care deeply about such things... It's a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don't have to be brave, smart, strong, or even lucky to join it, you just have to be libtard."

- P. J. O'Rourke:
Mar 20, 2011 at 4:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterTaterSalad
tater salad...no one could call me a liberal (or a conservative for that matter) and i support liz warren and the cfpb...it is the only issue upon which i differ with ron paul...the banks need a strong regulator...all the other agencies are captured...and they are trying to capture this one as well...i say get rid/consolidate the other agencies...make the cfpb the de facto bank regulator...the fed failed...the fdic failed...the federal home loan board failed.
Mar 20, 2011 at 4:14 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
She may be UNqualified and INexperienced for her job - but she's not the only high level government Official like that!
So like another I can think of - this position may be her life's "claim to fame".
In any case, in an AMERICAN democracy where the system of checks and balances is critical to protect the PEOPLE's interests, there should NEVER be a government office or group that operates without Congressional oversight. None, ever.
Mar 21, 2011 at 4:34 PM | Unregistered Commenterthebestofspain
...it is the only issue upon which i differ with ron paul...the banks need a strong regulator...

And, there is someone close by you, Bail, that thinks labor needs a strong government regulator...and someone else thinks railroads need a strong government regulator...and someone else thinks the environment needs a strong government regulator...and on and on and on a thousand times over until we have...The United States government today, not the one created in 1776!
Mar 21, 2011 at 6:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Dyer
David...remind me the next time the railroad industry gets leveraged 300-1 on synthetic derivatives and blows up the world...
Mar 21, 2011 at 8:38 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
"...remind me the next time the railroad industry gets leveraged 300-1 on synthetic derivatives and blows up the world... "

Who got burned in the financial fiasco? The smart operators who realized what was going on and avoided the game? No. The quick-buck artists who realized what was going on but thought they could get in and out before the house of cards collapsed? Some of them, yes, many, no. Or, the people who trusted that the government regulators would not let something like this happen? Most, if not all of them, yes!
Mar 22, 2011 at 9:20 AM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Dyer
@ David, you should see what happened to Cerberus in Japan....



Cerberus Capital Management’s hedge fund assets that were put into locked-up funds reportedly were hit by the natural and manmade tragedies in Japan.

The hedge fund investments in what were called special vehicles, had about 30% exposure to Japan, according to a MarketWatch report.
Mar 22, 2011 at 9:32 AM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
I'm all for zero government oversight of the banks, <em>the same day as there is zero government protection for the banks</em>. On that day American business and the American people will see they're dealing with loan shark scum-buckets who have nothing on their mind but profit at any cost, and are ruthless enough to make the Mafia blush. Everyone would see how the likes of Goldman, Citi, Wells Fargo, BoA, and their hired "servicers" are turning the mortgage mess into a massive grab of houses, land, and cash. Forge the paperwork, break into the houses, attach all the assets, and board up the windows and doors, and charge any expenses back to the borrower's tab. Just don't use the courts to process it and lend it legitimacy, the sheriff to apply the muscle, and the credit rating system to hold the bankers' grudge, and most especially don't use the American taxpayer to bail them out of trouble. In other words, government should let the banksters just operate however they want, because without the legal system to cast them in a golden glow, it will become obvious they're animals and should be shunned.

I can't see how capitalizing any random words in this comment can make it more persuasive.
Mar 22, 2011 at 7:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterJay C. Davis
Is it safe to assume, Jay C., that you don't care much for bankers? There were 6,911 commercial banks in the U.S. as of September 2009. If the average employment of each bank is 100 people, that makes approximately 690,000 who are loan shark scum-buckets who have nothing on their mind but profit at any cost, and are ruthless enough to make the Mafia blush.
I really did not realize that. Thanks for the information. My bankers must be the lone exceptions. If you would like, I will forward their names and address to you.
Mar 22, 2011 at 11:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Dyer
David, Touche, you made me think about it. It's not bankers I loathe (I know none besides the occasional teller), it's the class-biased, anti-poor regulations that govern their business dealings. I have no doubt most of those 690,000 bankers are honest, hard-working people who deliver the services they promise at the price they stated. But has your kid ever had half her paycheck tagged by the bank because she made a mistake in her first checking account estimating when the paycheck would clear? Ever gone through a foreclosure after missing a payment, only to find the bank (which you may have never dealt with) will no longer accept your payments, and they've added on penalties, collection fees, and service charges that equal more than a year of mortgage payments, and likely were never spelled out in the original loan? And you have to pay them because the Bush administration made it harder than driving a camel through the eye of a needle to claim bankruptcy protection? When they don't even have the paperwork to prove they own the mortgage? Have you ever totaled the cost of an apartment full of furniture that came from Rent-A-Center? Cashed a check at the Check Cashing joint downtown? Think about the implications of an account that's free if you keep a $5,000 balance, but jumps to a couple hundred bucks a year if the balance drops below that? The regulations make it profitable to create and exacerbate poverty. That practice is despicable and classist, whether it's legal or not.

For the record, my primary bank (which is BoA) is in the same building as my employer, and for that geographic accident I get free checking, free use of 3 ATM machines in the building and thousands of others across the country, a no-fee credit card I pay off every month (hence it's free), I use their excellent website to pay my bills (I haven't written a check in 5+ years), and I have a savings account there, because it's so easy to make deposits and transfers. I have a 401K (elsewhere) and happily, no mortgage. I'm middle class. I don't believe anyone's work is worth a 10 million dollar salary, and anyone who's worth over $100 million and is still working is frankly just not from my tribe and my ability to empathize with them in any way just isn't there.
Mar 23, 2011 at 7:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterJay C. Davis
The CEO's, Upper Management, and others on the big bonus gravy train are the loan shark scum-bucket fraudsters, The salaried employes are probably considered low order fair game just like the rest of the middle class.

Disband the FED, put us back on the gold standard and to hell with the banks, actually I should say, to hell with these Gambling Casinos that claim to be banks.
Mar 23, 2011 at 10:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush
Well, Jay and Sage, I don't think we are really on different pages as far as the problem. Perhaps it is just the solution we disagree about.
I believe the problem with big banks (and it is by no means only a problem in the banking iindustry) is they are so heavily regulated and overseen by government that government has become the primary entity to whom they think are are responsible to satisfy - not their customers.
Remove several layers of regulations and rules and force the banking industry to be responsible to their customers instead of regulators and competition for those customers will change the way banks do business.
All the laws, rules, regulations, and regulators imposed on the industry since the 30s haven't seemed to eliminate the immoral and unethical behavior on the part of some bankers.
The brokerage companies and investment bankers all must have "compliance officers" on staff just to keep up with the regulations. This is a double-edged sword...by having to be so involved and up-to-date with the myriad, changing regulations, it becomes easier to figure out ways to circumvent them!
Simple, basic rules requiring disclosure and transparancy and against fraud and deceptive practices keep other industries honest. Why should we think the banking industry is any different?
Mar 24, 2011 at 8:33 AM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Dyer
I'm sorry to say it David, but our views couldn't be further apart. By characterizing the issue as nothing but short-sighted over-regulation, you demonstrate you're terribly short of information. Read GRIFTOPIA by Matt Taibbi, and FREEFALL by Alfred Stiglitz. If you don't have time for a whole book, just check out Rolling Stone online, for Taibbi's very recent article called something like "Why Aren't the Big Bankers in Jail?" This isn't about whether Bob's bank can afford to put in a wheelchair ramp to comply with some new misguided federal mandate. This is about keeping sovereign control of the nation's economy in the face of multi-national, slash-and-burn, greed capitalism. For all the "deregulate to win" conservatives, there's a perfect real-world example to illustrate what happens when you remove the teeth from the regulations and simultaneously underfund the regulators. It's called Mexico. I don't want our country to look like that. To see the effects of unbridled global capitalism without proper and adequate regulations, read up on the recent history of Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Portugal... note the names of those involved and the patterns of behavior. These are not our friends.
Mar 25, 2011 at 5:46 AM | Unregistered CommenterJay C. Davis

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.