A look at the audio for Bernie’s New York Daily News interview

[pat_k]

You’ll find the full audio for the Daily News Interview at the bottom of this post.

Hearing the interview, as opposed to reading it, is telling. The skeptical, at times sarcastic, tone of the questioner comes through loud and clear. As does the clarity of Bernie. Taken as a whole, Bernie does very well. Portions of the interview are great.

The heat Bernie is getting about his answers to the “how” of breaking up the banks is unjustified

Because it’s the part he seems to be taking the most heat for, I listened particularly closely to the Q&A about breaking up the banks. That part of the audio starts at 9:39. Of particular note is a small, but very problematic, error in the transcript. Discussion of this portion of the interview with observations below.

_____________________________________________________________

Bernie starts his answer to the "how do you do it" question by stating:

Let's look at the merits of the issue before we talk about how to get there. Right now what you have is two factors:

1. We bailed out wall street because the banks were too big to fail, correct?. It turns out that three out of four largest banks are bigger than they were when they were 'too big to fail.'

pat_k comment:
Obviously if they were too big to fail then, and are bigger, they are too big now.

2. If you look at the six largest financial institutions in this country, their assets are somewhere around 10 trillion dollars. That is equivalent to 58% of the GDP. They issue 2/3rds of the credit cards in this country, and about 1/3rd of the mortgages. That is a lot of power. And I think that if someone like a Teddy Roosevelt were alive today, he would look at that -- forgetting even the risk element; the bailout element -- and just looking at the financial power that these guys have, would say that these guys have too much power.

Regarding how you go about doing it, he states:

You have legislation passed giving the authority to the Secretary of the Treasury to determine, under Dodd Frank, that these banks are a danger to the economy.

In answer to the question “Do you think Fed now has that authority?,” Bernie states:

I don't know if the Fed has it, but I think the administration can have it.

pat_k comment:
i.e., the administration could be given it via legislation.

In answer to the question "How does a president turn to JP Morgan Chase, or have the treasury turn to any of those banks, and say 'now you must do' x, y, and z?"

Well you do have the authority under the Dodd Frank legislation to do that."

pat_k comment:
It’s impossible to know what types of constraints the questioner meant by "x, y, and z." Perhaps Bernie should have asked for a clarification, but he apparently made an assumption that the "x,y, and z" referred to the types constraints the Fed is empowered to impose under Dodd Frank that would require banks to restructure to comply. He answered accordingly.

In answer to Bernie, the questioner says: "You do? Just by Federal Reserve Fiat? You do. “

pat_k comment:
Given how imprecise the x, y, z question was, it would have probably been more appropriate to ask Bernie to clarify the types of constraints he is referring to. Instead, the questioner reflects back a mischaracterization of Bernie’s answer ("You do? Just by Federal Reserve Fiat?&quot His restatement (i.e., misstatement) makes it sound like Bernie just said Fed currently has some unlimited authority. The sarcastic and dismissive tone the questioner uses might be appropriate if Bernie had actually asserted that, but he said no such thing.

In response you hear Bernie say:

"Well..."

The questioner interrupts him, saying “OK” (with finality).

Now, this is important. This last part, from questioner’s “You do?" to “OK” (11:00 to 11:08) is WRONG in the transcript.

Here’s how it was transcribed:

Daily News: "You do, just by Federal Reserve fiat, you do?"

Sanders: "Yeah. Well, I believe you do."

Daily News: "So if you look forward, a year..."

The transcription has put words in Bernie’s mouth that he did not say ("Yes, Well, I believe you do" when in fact he just says "Well&quot . The way the transcript reads, it sounds like Bernie is endorsing the questioner's mischaracterization of his answer, when in fact it sounds like he was about to challenge it. The transcript also leaves out the questioner's interruption of Bernie and closure of the topic with his "OK."

Just to be perfectly clear, this is the actual exchange as you will hear it in the audio:

Daily News: "You do? Just.. ah .. by Federal Reserve fiat? You do."

Sanders: "Well..."

Daily News (talking over Bernie and cutting off whatever he was going to say): “OK”

(The OK is stated clearly with finality. And then the questioner immediately moves on)

Daily News: "So if you look forward, a year..."

It seems to me that a lot of the brouhaha about Bernie’s so-called “ignorance” can be put down to three, seemingly small, things:

1) A question about the Feds power to do "x, y, z." In absence of any specification of what x, or y, or z is, assumptions were made about what was meant. Questioner appears to have one thing in mind, while Bernie has something else.

2) A mistake in the transcript puts words into Bernie’s mouth (“I believe you do”). Words endorsing the questioner’s misstatement of his answer. Words he did not say.

3) The questioner cutting off Bernie’s response to the mischaracterization, and then closing the topic with a firm “OK.” (And the fact that Bernie let this go and moved on with the questioner.)

I invite you to listen to the entire thing for yourself, something I don’t think many talking heads have bothered to do. If you do take the time, I think you too will conclude the bashing of Bernie’s “performance” -- and the ubiquity intensity of it – is unjustified. As I said above, he does very well, and portions of the interview are great.

One other thing to mention. Barney Frank has been slamming Bernie, asserting that he is focusing only on "size," while ignoring the problem of the risk/indebtedness/leverage ratio. His assertions hold no water. Bernie clearly acknowledges the enormous dangers posed the current leverage ratios. He makes it clear he thinks it’s a big problem when he precedes his discussion with the caveat “-- forgetting even the risk element; the bailout element -- and just looking at the financial power that these guys have.” (He’s effectively saying, “even forgetting this one incredible danger and just focusing on this other one, it’s clear we have a big problem.)

P.S., the Daily News appears to have gone out of its way to select unflattering photos of Bernie to display on the screen.

[NWCorona]

1. Yup!

I wish the audio was better tho

[uponit7771]

2. Like his answers to "revolution" and foreign policy and getting things past congress...

... this apathy towards getting things done or even knowing how is typical

[revbones]

3. It was a disgusting hit job. n

[GreatGazoo]

4. thanks for this analysis and transcription