# Elizabeth Warren and the Presidency **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 24, 2013, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838 "2013-03-24T19:07:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/441 "2014-06-10T18:14:55Z")
When you realize you’re wrong, let us know, willya? Save some typing in the meanwhile. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/442 "2014-06-10T18:32:06Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > There was no intervention. We supported the coup, but we didn’t make the coup happen. [Well, we did and we didn’t, and mostly we did.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_coup_of_1973#U.S._involvement) > [@](#): > > A report prepared by the United States Intelligence Community in 2000, at the direction of the National Intelligence Council, and echoed by the Church committee, states that > > > [@](#): > > > > Although CIA did not instigate the coup that ended Allende’s government on 11 September 1973, it was aware of coup-plotting by the military, had ongoing intelligence collection relationships with some plotters, and—because CIA did not discourage the takeover and **had sought to instigate a coup in 1970** —probably appeared to condone it. > > The report says that the CIA “actively supported the military Junta after the overthrow of Allende but did not assist Pinochet to assume the Presidency.”[32] After a review of recordings of telephone conversations between Nixon and Henry Kissinger, Robert Dallek concluded that both of them used the CIA to actively destabilize the Allende government. In one particular conversation about the news of Allende’s overthrow, Kissinger complains about the lack of recognition of the American role in the overthrow of a “communist” government, upon which Nixon remarked “Well, we didn’t - as you know - our hand doesn’t show on this one.”[33] > > Historian Peter Winn found “extensive evidence” of United States complicity in the coup. He states that its covert support was crucial to engineering the coup, as well as for the consolidation of power by the Pinochet regime following the takeover. Winn documents an extensive CIA operation to fabricate reports of a coup against Allende, as justification for the imposition of military rule.[6] Peter Kornbluh asserts that the CIA destabilized Chile and helped create the conditions for the coup, citing documents declassified by the Clinton administration.[34] Other authors point to the involvement of the Defense Intelligence Agency, agents of which allegedly secured the missiles used to bombard the La Moneda Palace.[35] Nonetheless, historian Mark Falcoff credits the CIA with preserving democratic opposition to Allende and preventing the “consolidation” of his supposed “totalitarian project”.[36] > > The U.S. Government’s hostility to the election of Allende in Chile was substantiated in documents declassified during the Clinton administration, which show that CIA covert operatives were inserted in Chile, in order to prevent a Marxist government from arising and for the purpose of spreading anti-Allende propaganda.[37] As described in the Church Committee report, the CIA was involved in multiple plots designed to remove Allende and then let the Chileans vote in a new election where he would not be a candidate. The first, non-military, approach involved attempting a constitutional coup. This was known as the Track I, approach, in which the CIA, with the approval of the 40 Committee, attempted to bribe the Chilean legislature, tried to influence public opinion against Allende, and provided funding to strikes designed to coerce him into resigning. It also attempted to get congress to confirm Jorge Alessandri as the winner of the presidential election. Alessandri, who was an accessory to the conspiracy, was ready to then resign and call for fresh elections. > > The other approach of the CIA, also known as the Track II approach, was an attempt to encourage a military coup, by creating a climate of crisis across the country. False flag operatives contacted senior Chilean military officers, and informed them that the U.S. would actively support a coup, but would revoke all military aid if such a coup did not happen.[34] In addition, the CIA gave extensive support for black propaganda against Allende, channeled mostly through El Mercurio. Financial assistance was also given to Allende’s political opponents, and for organizing strikes and unrest to destabilize the government. By 1970, the U.S. manufacturing company ITT Corporation owned of 70% of Chitelco, the Chilean Telephone Company, and also funded El Mercurio. The CIA used ITT as a means of disguising the source of the illegitimate funding Allende’s opponents received.[38][39] On 28 September 1973, ITT’s headquarters in New York City, was bombed, allegedly for the involvement of the company in Allende’s overthrow.[40] > [@adaher](#): > > Plus Allende had already destroyed Chilean democracy. [How, exactly?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/443 "2014-06-10T18:38:08Z")
As I explained, by ruling in an unconstitutional fashion. There is more to democracy than voting for a President. If the other branches are rendered powerless by the executive, that’s not democracy, that’s fascism. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/444 "2014-06-10T18:39:42Z")
But a foreign-sponsored military dictatorship, now _that’s_ ruling constitutionally! Damn, son … ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/445 "2014-06-10T18:49:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > As I explained, by ruling in an unconstitutional fashion. More specifically. Contards say that about **Obama,** after all, it’s meaningless without more. Please find and quote something in that Wiki article that I helpfully linked for your perusal, that constitutes “ruling in an unconstitutional fashion,” in terms of Chile’s constitution at the time. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/446 "2014-06-10T19:09:29Z")
The judical branch said he was, unanimously. The Chamber said he was and called on the military to restore order. The country was in chaos. I’m not sure what other evidence you need. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/447 "2014-06-10T19:12:40Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The judical branch said he was, unanimously. The Chamber said he was and called on the military to restore order. The country was in chaos. I’m not sure what other evidence you need. I need specific **acts** on his part and cites for their illegality. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/448 "2014-06-10T19:25:57Z")
I’m not going to cite you Chilean law from 1972. Now you’re just filibustering. This is what the Chamber said in its resolution: **The resolution declared that the Allende Government sought “. . . to conquer absolute power with the obvious purpose of subjecting all citizens to the strictest political and economic control by the State . . . [with] the goal of establishing a totalitarian system”, claiming it had made “violations of the Constitution . . . a permanent system of conduct.” Essentially, most of the accusations were about the Socialist Government disregarding the separation of powers, and arrogating legislative and judicial prerogatives to the executive branch of government. Finally, the resolution condemned the creation and development of government-protected armed groups, which . . . are headed towards a confrontation with the armed forces. President Allende’s efforts to re-organize the military and the police forces were characterised as notorious attempts to use the armed and police forces for partisan ends, destroy their institutional hierarchy, and politically infiltrate their ranks.** Now you can choose to disbelieve the elected legislature’s allegations if you want, but at the same time, you are obligated to be just as skeptical of Allende’s. ---
**Author:** ![Ignatz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/3be4f8/32.png) [@Ignatz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ignatz)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/449 "2014-06-10T23:42:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I’m still puzzled where people get the idea that Hillary is going to run. I got the idea last week when I received a campaign donation solicitation from her. I returned the form _sans_ $ and wrote on it that I was for Liz Warren for POTUS, with HRC for veep. Today I got a solicitation from Al Franken, the latest recipient of the list with my name and address on it. I have given up all pol contributions except for the checkoff on my tax return(s). ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2014, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/450 "2014-06-11T13:12:01Z")
Her new book reads like a campaign platform, too. As for now, she certainly isn’t \*not \*running. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2014, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/451 "2014-06-11T13:14:01Z")
Hopefully she does run. Clinton’s polling great and I’m sure Republicans are as unhappy to face her as many Democrats are to run her. Warren can beat Clinton, because, well, anyone to her left can beat her in a primary. She just doesn’t seem to know how to make the case, all she knows how to do is play not to lose. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2014, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/452 "2014-06-11T15:10:42Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Hopefully she does run. Clinton’s polling great and I’m sure Republicans are as unhappy to face her as many Democrats are to run her. Warren can beat Clinton, because, well, anyone to her left can beat her in a primary. She just doesn’t seem to know how to make the case, all she knows how to do is play not to lose. That might be enough if she gets through the primaries. The Republicans seem to pull every trick in the book trying to lose – they really know how to make the case that people should be afraid of them being President. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/453 "2014-06-13T00:35:17Z")
Here’s some Warren-news: [Senate Pubs having filibustered her student-loan reform bill](http://www.thenation.com/blog/180215/elizabeth-warren-their-vote-against-student-loan-reform-gop-has-sided-billionaires), Elizabeth Warren is thinking of going to Kentucky to campaign for Alison Lundergan Grimes to unseat McConnell. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/454 "2014-06-13T00:57:08Z")
That bill is not reform, nor does it side with the billionaires. Wow she’s getting Bachmann-crazy. Reform is not making debt easier to get and easier to shoulder. That’ll just cause even more problems and cost the taxpayers money when those chickens come home to roost. Secondly, the government took over the student loan industry. So if anything, the Republicans sided with the government against students, or more accurately, with the taxpayers against students. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/455 "2014-06-13T03:13:16Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That bill is not reform, nor does it side with the billionaires. Wow she’s getting Bachmann-crazy. Warren could get past the Cherokee thing and claim to be the Last Daughter of Krypton and she’d be barely one percent as crazy as Bachmann. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/456 "2014-06-13T13:23:26Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Reform is not making debt easier to get and easier to shoulder. If much lower interest rates are available on the Holy Free Market, which they are, then yes, it is. Aren’t you guys supposed to be in favor of that stuff? > [@](#): > > That’ll just cause even more problems and cost the taxpayers money when those chickens come home to roost. And meanwhile college grads have a chance of paying off those loans before they die. Certainly \*they \*would call it reform. > [@](#): > > So if anything, the Republicans sided with the government against students, or more accurately, with the taxpayers against students. Yes, always with dividing people and pitting one group against another, isn’t it, with them? Students (actually graduates would be a much more accurate term, you might get your facts straight) ARE taxpayers, and many, many taxpayers ARE graduates and students. But, it’s a Democratic-sponsored bill, with majority support, so naturally it has to be blocked like any other, hmm? Sad, as always, sad. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/457 "2014-06-14T00:23:56Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > If much lower interest rates are available on the Holy Free Market, which they are, then yes, it is. Aren’t you guys supposed to be in favor of that stuff? In a free market, students would be charged higher debt, especially the ones not likely to pay it back. > [@](#): > > Yes, always with dividing people and pitting one group against another, isn’t it, with them? Students (actually graduates would be a much more accurate term, you might get your facts straight) ARE taxpayers, and many, many taxpayers ARE graduates and students. Does the bill only apply to graduates? How about graduates with useless degrees who don’t make any money? And it’s Warren dividing people, in this case making up a group as opposing the bill when there’s no evidence that billionaires care about this issue one way or the other. Again, she just made stuff up to foster division. That’s what crazy people do. > [@](#): > > But, it’s a Democratic-sponsored bill, with majority support, so naturally it has to be blocked like any other, hmm? Sad, as always, sad. It’s looting the taxpayers. True reform would be to allow students(and taxpayers) to clear their debt through bankruptcy. Debts to the government should not receive special consideration. All should be dischargeable if the person is truly unable to pay. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/458 "2014-06-14T18:53:18Z")
No, the Republicans are siding against the taxpayers, here. The government does have an obligation to taxpayers, but that obligation is not to make taxes as low as possible. Rather, their obligation is to make sure tax dollars are spent as wisely as possible, and there are few ways to spend tax dollars wiser than helping people get educations. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/459 "2014-06-14T19:29:31Z")
I would hope you’d be able to see the problem with letting fresh graduates simply shed their debt load and have a clear credit rating before they’d even need one. Who _wouldn’t_ do that? Nobody would ever pay for school again. It’s also puzzling that you don’t think paying nothing via bankruptcy would be “looting the taxpayers”, while paying them only market-rate interest _would_ be. It’s almost as if you don’t quite think any of these things out before posting them. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2014, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838/460 "2014-06-25T16:05:22Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > It’s looting the taxpayers. True reform would be to allow students(and taxpayers) to clear their debt through bankruptcy. Debts to the government should not receive special consideration. All should be dischargeable if the person is truly unable to pay. Yes, well, the reason it’s not that way is that (1) Congress (i.e., the government/creditor) makes those rules and (2) letting people discharge debts to the government through bankruptcy is **also** “looting the taxpayers.” Think about it. It’s the same thing with [sovereign immunity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity), the doctrine that the state cannot be sued for liability claims in its own courts, or, as they say in the British common-law system, “Wrongs do not run against the King.” In most states sovereign immunity has been to some degree abrogated by legislation (but there’s usually a statutory cap on recoverable damages). Some (including my colleagues in the plaintiffs’ personal-injury bar, who sometimes handle cases where the tortfeasor is a public agency) say SI should be abolished entirely, it has no legitimate place in a democratic system, “We do not have a king!” But, if that seems like a no-brainer, consider that to sue the state is ultimately to sue the taxpayers, which is to sue the voters; so it’s not exactly an easy sell politically. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-and-the-presidency/653838.md?page=22)