Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Kittycat

(10,493 posts)
Sun Apr 3, 2016, 11:24 PM Apr 2016

Politifact: Clinton pants on fire. Only candidate Wall Street is "actually running ads against."

Hillary Clinton says she's the only candidate Wall Street is "actually running ads against."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/03/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-claims-meet-press-wall-street-atta/


"I'm the only candidate in the Democratic primary, or actually on either side, who Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers are actually running ads against," she responded. "So I find this, again, a kind of, you know, circuitous way to raise questions about my record."

Is it true that Clinton is the sole target of Wall Street this cycle?

The Clinton campaign referred us to our own fact-check of an attack ad sponsored by the hedge fund-backed conservative super PAC, Future45. While this supports Clinton’s point that the financial sector has spent money against her, it doesn’t back the notion that Wall Street has only attacked her.

--snip--

Future45 has also sponsored one ad against Sanders. ESA Fund, a conservative super PAC, is 56 percent funded by the financial sector and has aired one anti-Sanders ad in Iowa. And last summer, Generation Forward, a pro-Martin O’Malley super PAC, went after Sanders’ record on guns. A fifth of its donations come from Wall Street.

Clinton’s own affiliated super PAC, Priorities USA Action, took a third of its donations from the financial sector. It has aired 11 ads against Trump and spent more than $61,000 targeting the Republican frontrunner.

---snip---

Our ruling

Clinton said, "I'm the only candidate in the Democratic primary, or actually on either side, who Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers are actually running ads against."

Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers are running ads against Clinton. But to say she’s the only one being attacked by people associated with the financial sector is preposterous.

The financial sector has contributed to both sides of the aisles, including to Clinton’s own campaign. Groups backed by Wall Street have run attack ads against virtually every candidate.

Clinton’s claim rates Pants on Fire!



9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Politifact: Clinton pants on fire. Only candidate Wall Street is "actually running ads against." (Original Post) Kittycat Apr 2016 OP
Hillary, take this L. nt RepubliCON-Watch Apr 2016 #1
Shouldn't it be "pantsuits on fire"? I know, it's too easy. :) reformist2 Apr 2016 #2
Wasn't there a movie of that? Pantsuits of Fire hedda_foil Apr 2016 #9
Hillary Clinton is a LIAR. AzDar Apr 2016 #3
+10000000 amborin Apr 2016 #7
Wall Street is terrified she'll tell them to cut it out again. beam me up scottie Apr 2016 #4
Full House Kittycat Apr 2016 #6
Another friggin' lie by Hillary. 840high Apr 2016 #5
That pants on fire from a thermonuclear holocaust done to it. Unwanted Democrat Apr 2016 #8
 
8. That pants on fire from a thermonuclear holocaust done to it.
Sun Apr 3, 2016, 11:52 PM
Apr 2016

All I had to do was Greenpeace's statement and check their sources, and do confirm that one Hillary D. R. Clinton has taken at least 350,000 in fossil fuel dollars.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Politifact: Clinton pants...