Obama's shady deals

[ChumpDumper]

Discrestionary trading without written consent. I'm not going to look up the code number. However, I will tell you if you open an account with a broker and he begins making stock trades without your express written consent he can get canned.

Then what exactly is a blind trust? Does Obama and every person in America need to give express written consent for every individual stock transaction. I really need to see that code.

Monetary penalty, suspension, loss of license. An arbitration panel would decide.

Not a criminal court? You're saying this isn't a crime?

first that we've heard about it, but maybe the NYT isn't the first thorn who's heard about it.

Yeah, they would just sit on it.

according to the article no.

So there really isn't anything here.

However, I now question his ethics.

Have you voted for anyone, ever?

[ggoose25]

Cheney went to war based on a flawed ideology. He just figured he might as well make money off the American people in the process.

[2centsworth]

Whottt is absolutely right.

I have people that make investments without my consent, but mostly on my own.

Never been accused of a crime.

a broker that makes trades without your consent is breaking a major NASD rule. Give me his name so I can show you what i mean.

[clambake]

Consent will only come in play if there's a client-broker dispute. That would be civil letigation.

[spurster]

It was a BLIND TRUST. The stockbroker is supposed to manage the portfolio without informing or consulting with the owner.

[2centsworth]

Consent will only come in play if there's a client-broker dispute. That would be civil letigation.

wrong on both counts.

[clambake]

Would you feel any better about Obama if he sued his broker? I doubt it.

[2centsworth]

It was a BLIND TRUST. The stockbroker is supposed to manage the portfolio without informing or consulting with the owner.

no BLIND TRUST established at the time of the trades.

[2centsworth]

Would you feel any better about Obama if he sued his broker? I doubt it.

no, his broker is out their trying to protect him.

[clambake]

So, your pissed because he LOST money. I get it. No profit to burn him at the stake with.

[2centsworth]

He's a politician


The last Presidential politician with ethics was George Washington.


There are two kinds of politicians...

Smartones(that are successful at achieving their goals) and Dumbones(who just kind of got lucky but there was no skill behind it). Those are the only 2 choices you ever truly have that have anything to do with ethics.

I still hold out hope for the person who is just trying to do the right thing.

[2centsworth]

So, your pissed because he LOST money. I get it. No profit to burn him at the stake with.

you were doing so well.

[ChumpDumper]

no BLIND TRUST established at the time of the trades.

But blind trusts do exist, don't they?

What is a blind trust and why do they all violate a "major NASD rule" according to you?

[Fillmoe]

you guys voted in a cokehead who's family was directly connected with adolf hitler..... and now y'all want to question this?

[clambake]

You're wrong about consent.

[2centsworth]

But blind trusts do exist, don't they?

What is a blind trust and why do they all violate a "major NASD rule" according to you?

I never never said that. Point is, there was no Blind Trust established at the time of the trades in question. I

[clambake]

Ohhhhh, that no t's had been crossed or i's dotted is your complaint. Lots of happens before contracts are complete. You snooze, you lose.

[clambake]

If Obama were republican, you would never have started this thread.

[2centsworth]

You're wrong about consent.

not at all. quick google search yield NYSE rule
Rules 408(a), (b) and (c)

"Violated Exchange Rules 408(a), (b) and (c) in that he exercised discretion in

the account of a customer without written authorization and without

notifying and obtaining the approval of his member firm employer"

[whottt]

I still hold out hope for the person who is just trying to do the right thing.

You just have to find the one who's ideas of how to ac ulate wealth and power, and the party line he is going to have to toe, will leave a legacy close to what you consider the right thing.

They are all about $$$ and power.


Why in the would you want that job if it wasn't for power? It's the worst job in the world for someone who is genuinely trying to do the right thing, it's a brutal job that ages the out of you...he'd either get killed, never get the nomination to begin with or have his own party job him. That job is not for typical human beings...it's for peple with an extreme ego and anyone who lacks that will be destroyed.


You'll have better luck finding a unicorn than a truly ethical politician.


David Robinson has unquestionable ethics and character...he won't get within 100 miles of politics for that reason. He's not willing to compromise his beliefs....I suspect most ethical men would come up with the same conclusion.

Even a by the book guy like Clark has to compromise his beliefs...

[2centsworth]

If Obama were republican, you would never have started this thread.

absolutely.

[clambake]

"from a person other than the customer"

You left that out.

[ChumpDumper]

not at all. quick google search yield NYSE rule
Rules 408(a), (b) and (c)

"Violated Exchange Rules 408(a), (b) and (c) in that he exercised discretion in

the account of a customer without written authorization and without

notifying and obtaining the approval of his member firm employer"

Is that authorization necessary for each individual trade? Every one of them?

[clambake]

no

[ChumpDumper]

2cents says different.