There seems to be no end to the efforts of right-wing efforts to disparage congressperson Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in order to diminish her popularity. In a congressional hearing, she sharply questioned the CEO of Wells Fargo, a truly disgraceful company, about its practices. It showed how well prepared she is for these hearings.
In addition she asked who bears liability for oil spills from the pipeline, and whether the people who financed it share in it.
.@RepAOC @AOC: "So, hypothetically, if there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline, why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?"@WellsFargo CEO Timothy Sloan: "Because we don't operate the pipeline." pic.twitter.com/TqXQD0WGwA
— CSPAN (@cspan) March 12, 2019
This prompted someone to make what she must have thought was a killer comparison to show how foolish Ocasio-Cortez was.
So using her own logic… Hypothetically, if @AOC made a drink while bartending, then served it to a person, who then killed a family of 5 while driving drunk, she should then be held accountable for the incident, right? Bartenders beware, she could be coming after you next!! https://t.co/RBRyLiMafM
— Marvel Marisa Murphy (@RodeoGirlsMarv) March 12, 2019
But the responses to this tweet showed that Murphy is clueless. Ocasio-Cortez has worked in bars and knows the law and she tweeted this in response.
Actually, in NYC if you’re a bartender and knowingly over-serve to someone, you *ARE* liable for things they do after they leave the bar, because you knowingly put them at risk for $.
Its called the Dram Shop Act. It’s a big reason why bartenders cut people off. And it works. https://t.co/u2XMRuNOyb
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 12, 2019
It is true that in a bar, the bar is not paying for the customer’s drink. But the broader issue is whether those who enable the creation of a disaster in any way are liable for the consequences.
“It was a risk we decided to take.” Of course you did, because you’re not held accountable when the pipeline fails after it’s built. The only risk you’re taking is them not paying off their loan.
Did I understand him correctly to be basically saying that “We’ll be exiting our relationship with that company as soon as they’ve paid off their loan”? Because duh. Or does the term amortization only apply to loan fees and stuff and not principle?
As for Murphy’s tweet, I was chuckling before I even got to the rebuttal since that’s been the case for decades now in most if not all states.