• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HFT trader, financial scammer, Hillary Donor, Nuclear Weapons expert

It's not like this is the first time some rich guy has stuck his nose in nuclear politics in Washington. I didn't hear you guys complain before...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_spectator/2016/03/trump_s_nuclear_experience_advice_for_reagan_in_1987.html
“I’m dealing at a very high level on this,” he said. With people in Washington. In the White House. There was too much at stake for him to risk the wrong kind of exposure on The Subject.
Click to expand...

:whiste:
 
compuwiz1 said:
Someone else did it before so it's ok, right?
Click to expand...

I guess you're right if you didn't want Donald Trump around nuclear policy we probably shouldn't want this guy. :thumbsup:

Unfortunately for conservatives, while this "scandal" is unseemly there doesn't appear to be anything illegal about it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/06/10/how_clinton_donor_rajiv_fernando_got_a_job_as_a_nuclear_expert_he_wasn_t.html

So just how big of a deal is this? In the big bucket of Clinton controversies (both real and imagined), this is merely a drop. Hillary and her staff had broad leeway to name pretty much whomever they wanted to the board, so while tapping Fernando was highly questionable, it wasn’t illegal. It is impossible to read the ABC report and not get a distinct whiff of favor trading, but there is no smoking gun—as there almost never is when it comes to this type of thing. In a political system where the inputs and outputs are both money and power, proof of guilt, or, really, innocence, rarely exists.
Click to expand...


You guys have already imagined her killing folks, aiding Americas enemy's and of course Bengahzi! Why should this make any impact?

While I could be wrong it's probably going to end with this:
1485598659284007341.GIF


The above is of course my personal opinion.
 
compuwiz1 said:
Someone else did it before so it's ok, right?
Click to expand...

You tell me? I'm sure we can both find twenty examples of both sides claiming the other side doing something first as a justification for an action. So the question is when will you start calling out your teams bullshit?

Me personally? I don't like these iou's, especially when dealing with highly sensitive material like our nuclear weapons strategy. I especially don't like unqualified people being given these positions. Its also obvious that the state department knew it was wrong as well.

I don't see any conclusive evidence that Hillary was involved though but it doesn't matter as she is ultimately the one responsible for the actions of her underlings.
 
Paratus said:
You guys have already imagined her killing folks, aiding Americas enemy's and of course Bengahzi! Why should this make any impact?

While I could be wrong it's probably going to end with this:
1485598659284007341.GIF


The above is of course my personal opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Of course, that is my personal opinion also.
 
What I want to know is why the wealthy CEO of a securities trading firm wants a position like. Someone please tell me there's a reason other than getting access to classified information that could affect the market.
 
Exophase said:
What I want to know is why the wealthy CEO of a securities trading firm wants a position like. Someone please tell me there's a reason other than getting access to classified information that could affect the market.
Click to expand...

Business as usual in Washington and one of the biggest problems with it.
 
ivwshane said:
You tell me? I'm sure we can both find twenty examples of both sides claiming the other side doing something first as a justification for an action. So the question is when will you start calling out your teams bullshit?
Click to expand...

I'm way too partisan to do that, but you wouldn't like it if I did.
 
Exophase said:
What I want to know is why the wealthy CEO of a securities trading firm wants a position like. Someone please tell me there's a reason other than getting access to classified information that could affect the market.
Click to expand...
Lots of good old inside information for Mr hft. Now tell me those goldman speeches were actually speeches and not "speeches".

Nice that they slow rolled the info to protect the secretary and undersecretary. Wouldn't want them to be called on corruption now, would we?

Nope, she's never been convicted. Nor ever will, but that doesn't bother lefties. She has a vagina, so it's all good.
 
What I'm wondering is if Clinton left any direct connections to tie her to this guy, or if she has managed to maintain plausible deniability and some underling will take the fall for putting this guy in that post.
 
jackstar7 said:
What I'm wondering is if Clinton left any direct connections to tie her to this guy, or if she has managed to maintain plausible deniability and some underling will take the fall for putting this guy in that post.
Click to expand...

Other than prolific donations to her, her campaign, her PACs, raised funds as a bundler, giving hundreds of thousands of the Billybob foundation, and the political advocacy group that retired her campaign debt, that's outstanding.

Otherwise, it's all 100% legit. Right?
 
Putting some rich guy on a board just for spending money isn't great. However, putting some rich guy in the Presidency just for spending money would be worse.
 
Ken g6 said:
Putting some rich guy on a board just for spending money isn't great. However, putting some rich guy in the Presidency just for spending money would be worse.
Click to expand...

And how many other boards did rich guys get access too? How much information were they given? How many laws, regulations, prosecutions, were sidetracked, ignored, forgotten, because of such actions? How many free trade agreements were bought? how many American jobs sold? How many times did this government look away when China manipulated its currency and unfairly arbitraged our manufacturing, IT, infrastructure...etc? How many times did we ignore them hacking and stealing our military data?

Yeah, it's just one time. They promise.
 
LegendKiller said:
Other than prolific donations to her, her campaign, her PACs, raised funds as a bundler, giving hundreds of thousands of the Billybob foundation, and the political advocacy group that retired her campaign debt, that's outstanding.

Otherwise, it's all 100% legit. Right?
Click to expand...

What the hell are you arguing against? I painted the picture that she's probably guilty in this. My question is whether she continued to be shrewd about how she insulated herself.

At some point you have to see how she might be the Michael Jordan of politics if she can pull all this off and walk away basically clean.

It's horrifying to consider, but also I'm in awe of the dexterity that she has with power. I'm not sure that's a bad trait for a president. It's uncomfortable, but I need to think on it more.
 
Ken g6 said:
Putting some rich guy on a board just for spending money isn't great. However, putting some rich guy in the Presidency just for spending money would be worse.
Click to expand...
Exactly. How detached from reality must one be to support Trump while whining about this guy being unqualified for some slot on a committee?
 
Ken g6 said:
Putting some rich guy on a board just for spending money isn't great. However, putting some rich guy in the Presidency just for spending money would be worse.
Click to expand...


One forgets that Hillary is quite rich herself, and anyone's campaign these days is "just spending money". Money is politics, if you don't have it you don't stand a chance.
 
UglyCasanova said:
One forgets that Hillary is quite rich herself, and anyone's campaign these days is "just spending money". Money is politics, if you don't have it you don't stand a chance.
Click to expand...

And her wealth is 100% derived from moves like this. A rich asshole who puts rich assholes on boards to make themselves more of a rich asshole.

Funny how that works. And people honestly think Trump is the bigger asshole.
 
If he's legally eligible to be on this committee I'm fine with it. The POTUS and his administration are entitled to have their choice of advice and if probably unqualified advice is what they want then let them deal with the consequences of this choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top