BLU
Active topics
  1. Don't care, I was never much a fan of Breitbart in all honesty. I'll keep my opinions till myself till there is more info.
  2. http://www.politicolnews.com/romney-son-investigated-for-8-billion-ponzi-scheme/#ixzz1txS9dRwg

    Romney & Son Investigated for 8 Billion Ponzi Scheme

    Mitt Romney and his son Tagg Romney have been implicated in a 8.5 billion dollar ponzi scheme with Wall Street investors Allen Stanford and James M. Davis.


    The pair are not cleared including their three partners in a court document verified, ongoing legal proceeding involving selling fraudulent CD’s to potential investors.

    The statement of fact, includes SIBL, Stanford International Bank, SGC Stanford Capital Management and the associates R. Allen Stanford, ( Allen Stanford) and James M. Davis stole money from investors through fraud. The group bilked investors by diverting funds to their own lifestyles through bonus money, salaries and compensation packages.

    The Stanford Financial Group now in receivership headed by Allen Stanford sold investments described as a “well-diversified portfolio”. Instead Stanford diverted the money to finance his own lavish lifestyle which include: jet planes, yacht, pleasure crafts, luxury cars, homes, travel on a company credit card.

    Tagg Romney

    Allen Stanford, James M. Davis and Laura Pendergest-Holt through SIBL (the bank) Stanford International Bank) hid the fraud by continuing to buy CD’s (Certificate of Deposit) and fabricated the performance of their investments. (More court documents: HERE) More information on the legal procedures: HERE A court date was set for January 23, 2012 but according to various reports Allen Stanford is incompetent to stand trial.

    Mitt Romney and Son Tagg in 2008 invested in Allen Stanford’s ponzi scheme to the tune of 10 million dollars initially in Solamere Capital a seed investment and received 1 million in returns. Tagg Romney joined in to help Solamere Capital located in Charlotte, North Carolina with three other prominent brokers.



    Tagg Romney is quoted as saying he was proud of his investment with Solamere now run by former executives of Stanford, ” They’re friends of ours, they used the Solamere name, we own a piece of them”. “We helped them get started”

    Despite claims by Tagg and Mitt Romney the investigation is still “ongoing” and the profits from Stanford and Solemere were unreported by Tagg Romney. He also did possess a minority stake in the business with Spencer Zwick and Eric Scheuermann.

    Spencer Zwich is Mitt Romney’s Chief Fundraiser. Investors in Stanford have not recovered their money, and the assets are still in receivership and frozen until the case is resolved. A total of 8.5 billion dollars is still unaccounted for and the billion dollar Ponzi scheme lays at Mitt Romney’s feet for his and his son’s investment partners who were all involved.

    Curated News



    ABC News Politics – Romney Camp Dismissive of Ponzi Accusation

    “But according to Think Progress, Tagg Romney’s account isn’t entirely accurate: “According to documents reviewed by ThinkProgess using the Pacer search engine, charges against Tim Bambauer, Deems May, and Brandon Phillips have not been dropped. A recent court filing shows May requesting the court for arbitration instead of going to trial.

    ThinkProgress also spoke to the deputy clerk for the federal District Court in Dallas, and confirmed that the three men are still defendants in the lawsuit to recover the Ponzi scheme money.”

    Why am I not surprised?
  3. And now, to the left:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/reality-check-yes-president-obama-is-a-hawk/256674/

    Reality Check: Yes, President Obama Is a Hawk

    MAY 3 2012, 12:17 PM ET 30
    Both parties have an interest in painting the president as a dove, but reporters should not allow that spin to skew their coverage.


    President Obama delivers a nationally televised address from Bagram Air Force Base Tuesday. / Reuters

    Hawk (noun): A person who favors military force or action in order to carry out foreign policy. -- The American Heritage Dictionary
    In a New York Times article titled "A Delicate New Balance on National Security," White House correspondent Peter Baker unintentionally demonstrates why it's problematic to describe a candidate's foreign policy by presenting the rhetoric put forth by the man and his partisan opponents.

    Says the article:
    One moment he boasts about taking out America's No. 1 enemy, and the next he vows to bring home troops from an unpopular war. For President Obama, the days leading up to his re-election kickoff have been spent straddling the precarious line between hawk and dove, and possibly redefining his party for years to come.
    Obama may be worried about the perception that he is dove. He may need to respond to Republicans who say that he has "a fundamentally weak approach to rivals and rogue states like Iran, North Korea and Russia," as Baker puts it. But let's not lose sight of his actual record.

    Obama isn't straddling a line between hawk and dove.

    He is a hawk.

    It's terrifying that isn't clear to everyone, because it suggests the neoconservative desire for even more foreign wars is skewing the way that Americans conceive of hawkishness and dovishness. It suggests we're defining "warmonger" down.

    Here are the facts:
    Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan, adding tens of thousands of troops at a cost of many billions of dollars.
    He committed American forces to a war in Libya, though he had neither approval from Congress nor reason to think events there threatened national security.
    He ordered 250 drone strikes that killed at least 1,400 people in Pakistan.
    He ordered the raid into Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden.
    He ordered the killings of multiple American citizens living abroad.
    He expanded the definition of the War on Terrorism and asserted his worldwide power to indefinitely detain anyone he deems a terrorist.
    He expanded drone attacks into Somalia.
    He ordered a raid on pirates in Somalia.
    He deployed military squads to fight the drug war throughout Latin America.
    He expanded the drone war in Yemen, going so far as to give the CIA permission to kill people even when it doesn't know their identities so long as they're suspected of ties to terrorism.
    He's implied that he'd go to war with Iran rather than permitting them to get nuclear weapons.
    In summary, President Obama escalated a major war and sent tens of thousands more troops to fight it, even as he joined in regime change in a different country, ordered drone strikes in at least three others, and sent commandos into Pakistan, a list of aggressive actions that isn't even exhaustive.

    It's perverse for that record to be rendered, in America's newspaper of record, as Obama "straddling the precarious line between hawk and dove." In fact, he is a hawk. Republicans are misrepresenting his record and positions and some progressives are doing the same, because they are rightly embarrassed by the gulf between his campaign promises and the record he's amassed.

    Aaron whatcha think?
  4. Don't really care. This election is going on far too long.
  5. Nancy Pelosi has come out as saying she want people to make more money so they van be taxed more. That just about sums up everything wrong with modern libralism.
  6. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:Nancy Pelosi has come out as saying she want people to make more money so they van be taxed more. That just about sums up everything wrong with modern libralism.

    What's "completely wrong" with that? Your schools and roads are built with that money.
  7. Thank you for proving my point.

  8. Ummm...yeah. What?

    It would be fair if people with more money would pay higher taxes but that isn't the case in the West. Countries with the biggest tax rates are those with the best living standards in the world. Scandinavian countries.

  9. Sorry, which point?

    All I can honestly think of "your point" is that you think each one should build his/her own houses and roads or what?


    Ok, let's put it under a spot you'll surely understand:
    Originally posted by LikeASongWhat's completely wrong with that? Your schools and roads are built army is sustained with that money.

  10. Left, right, liberals, conservatives...from what I see none of them are right, none of them do the right thing, specially in the US, but also in other parts of the world. I'm starting to lose hope in all political systems.
  11. Originally posted by Yogi:[..]

    Ummm...yeah. What?

    It would be fair if people with more money would pay higher taxes but that isn't the case in the West. Countries with the biggest tax rates are those with the best living standards in the world. Scandinavian countries.

    For me its not fair. Its just handy because rich people wont miss it. However that has nothing to do with fair.

    And in contrary to what you say, maybe for the exception of the USA, but in the west rich people not only pay more absolutely (in euro's/etc) but also relatively (in percentage).

    I don't really see whats wrong with that, actually I would prefer a flat rate (in percent). With a certain bottom level. Because that would be fair. And make stuff lots easier. Unfortunately that makes me about the only Dutchman with this plan. We are pretty communist here.
  12. So, it looks like Sarkozy will lose elections in France...
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.