AARP slams Trum pic.twitter.com/iqdTwDXuF2
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) February 3, 2017
Taibbi: Extreme Vetting, But Not for Banks https://t.co/HVsCJnyDBc via @RollingStone
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
"There's nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie Dimon, so thank you, Jamie."
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
Fact: By pausing the fiduciary rule, @POTUS has placed power in the hands of banks to place their financial interests above yours.
— Rep. Jamie Raskin (@RepRaskin) February 3, 2017
The snarkiness is strong with this one, @antillaview. https://t.co/P1Oy7DVRHL via @TheStreet
— Michael Rapoport (@rapoportwsj) February 3, 2017
Imagine a doctor saying you need unnecessary surgery because it makes them money. That’s what the fiduciary rule prevents with your $.
— Matt Kaufman (@kauffee) February 3, 2017
Rolling back Dodd-Frank and Fiduciary Rule serves only a single purpose: to allow rich people to steal from poor people. pic.twitter.com/iQvHM3NmmD
— Comfort & Adam (@ComfortAndAdam) February 3, 2017
Killing the "fiduciary rule" is the definition of choosing Wall Street over Main Street. #doddfrank
— Bradley McCormick (@BradleyMcCormic) February 3, 2017
The notion that all Democrats are against today's fiduciary EO is false. Centrist Dems were against Phyllis Borzi and Obama admin on this.
— Kevin Cirilli (@kevcirilli) February 3, 2017
Is there any argument against extending the fiduciary rule that doesn't boil down to: some people should have a legal right to rip you off?
— Avi Asher-Schapiro (@AASchapiro) February 3, 2017
The fiduciary rule means your financial advisor must work in your best financial interest. Repealing it means they don't.
— Lizzie O'Leary (@lizzieohreally) February 3, 2017
@SpeakerRyan totally. I mean why would we want to require someone to act in the best interest of a client when instead they can screw them.
— Cheese Lover (@winewithdogs) February 3, 2017
@SpeakerRyan Yes. Making it so advisers can cheat and bilk their customers. Wise. You guys have no shame.
— Libertymonger (@Libertymonger99) February 3, 2017
@SpeakerRyan Lyin' 🤥 Ryan translator: All my Wall Street buddies who give the GOP cash will be able to prey upon the elderly again. Yippee!
— Stuart Rojstaczer (@StuartEtc) February 3, 2017
After literally standing next to Wall St CEOs, @realDonaldTrump made it easier for investment advisors to cheat you out of your savings.
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) February 3, 2017
Donald Trump is going to make sure that Wall Street can keep lying to clients and feeding off retirees"
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
Trump Announces Plan to Let Wall Street Scam America Again https://t.co/Vs1dXkHE4R via @intelligencer
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
Reminder: the "fiduciary rule" says financial adviser must act in your best interests, rather than earning secret kickback. Good rule! #MAGA
— Deplorable Dave (@egg_deplorable) February 3, 2017
Trump is delaying a rule that requires retirement advisors to act in their client's best interests. Seriously. That's not a joke.
— Michael Linden (@MichaelSLinden) February 3, 2017
Trump is signing an order making it legal for banks to deliberately give you bad financial advice for profit.
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) February 3, 2017
Satire on Financial Advisors renewed permission to screw investors with the elimination of the Fiduciary Rule https://t.co/N8sHfAigB7
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
@washingtonpost Because who wants their retirement advisor to be a fiduciary? It's more fun to be screwed in your golden years.
— Bree (@breesword) February 3, 2017
Serious question, is there any reason, other than making more money for financial advisors/wall street, to get rid of the fiduciary rule?
— Eliot (@etmckinley) February 3, 2017
.@tomkeene @flacqua
— J.M. Hamilton (@jmhamiltonblog) February 3, 2017
Begs the question, why was the fiduciary rule necessary? Because banks/brokers don't act in client's interests.
Trump suspending the fiduciary rule is really bad. He's saying government has no authority to forbid advisers to screw their clients
— T'nt'cleSpaceHorror (@AshokaTheBear) February 3, 2017
The irony is that it will INCREASE the wealth gap. Rich people have access to fiduciary advisors while the mass market is sold annuities.
— Downtown Josh Brown (@ReformedBroker) February 3, 2017
Whew, that was close, financial advisors won't have to stop cheating their clients https://t.co/W8EC6haGTR
— David Dayen (@ddayen) February 3, 2017
White House will move to gut Obama's rule on retirement advice. https://t.co/ejlRNbm7E6 pic.twitter.com/t2Imz0chPt
— Nick Timiraos (@NickTimiraos) February 3, 2017
A betrayal of the American middle class this would be, for the benefit of the swamp creatures we were told the opposite of. https://t.co/hrvUxcNRs0
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
Goodbye Fiduciary Rule, hello continued profit skimming on the unknowing, by the Goldman Sachs' and Wells Fargo's of our country pic.twitter.com/Ecjl4LRX54
— Abner Doon (@Aenbrnood) February 3, 2017
Democrats are hopelessly out of touch with the populism of an ex-Goldman Sachs banker allowing bankers to give clients bad advice again.
— Matt O'Brien (@ObsoleteDogma) February 3, 2017
