Chelsea Clinton's husband closing Greek-focused hf after losing 90% of investors asstes

[Anonymous]

I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

[Anonymous]

He is a very shrewd investor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He is a very shrewd investor

Hence, the Clinton Dynasty marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

It's more important for the media to focus for three days on Melania's speech screw-up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

It's more important for the media to focus for three days on Melania's speech screw-up.

Because that story is man-bites-dog.

[Anonymous]

Really old news
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/business/dealbook/clinton-son-in-laws-firm-is-said-to-close-greece-hedge-fund.html?_r=0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Strangely, this whole issue - the Mezvinsky hedge fund - has not been discussed in the media too much.

Because "Rich investors lose money betting on Greek debt" is a dog-bites-man story.

Also, sons-in-law are not generally newsworthy for a campaign. Unless they get a veto on VP picks or something.

Or unless they are part of the Clinton corruption problem. You scratch my back; I'll scratch your back.

the clintons clearly directed their "friends" over to Mark's hedge fund. It was a back door way to funnel $ to Chelsea and Mark. Who then proceeded to buy a $10 million apartment which they say they paid for without help from their families. Right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

** crickets **

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

I'm pretty sure he's not going to be "fired" from the investment firm he co-founded with two colleagues from Goldman Sachs. This wasn't their only hedge fund and its a safe bet he wasn't making investment decisions on his own. By the way, do you even understand how a hedge fund operates? Please don't continue to embarsss yourself with inane comments that are barely coherent comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

I'm pretty sure he's not going to be "fired" from the investment firm he co-founded with two colleagues from Goldman Sachs. This wasn't their only hedge fund and its a safe bet he wasn't making investment decisions on his own. By the way, do you even understand how a hedge fund operates? Please don't continue to embarsss yourself with inane comments that are barely coherent comments.

Oops. Fat finger hit submit prematurely. Pot meets kettle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

** crickets **

Not sure you guys are getting it. It's potentially shady, even if he didn't violate his fiduciary duty under the law. Do you think all those investors would have given him the same amount of money even if he wasn't married to Chelsea? If not, why did they do it? Also, even if they feel ripped off after the fund blew up, do you really believe they will think it's in their best interest to go after Chelsea's hubby? Seems like they might just want to keep quiet for now and maybe look for a favor down the road when HRC is president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

** crickets **

Not sure you guys are getting it. It's potentially shady, even if he didn't violate his fiduciary duty under the law. Do you think all those investors would have given him the same amount of money even if he wasn't married to Chelsea? If not, why did they do it? Also, even if they feel ripped off after the fund blew up, do you really believe they will think it's in their best interest to go after Chelsea's hubby? Seems like they might just want to keep quiet for now and maybe look for a favor down the road when HRC is president.

Everything involving hedge funds is potentially shady. So, in theory, he is disqualified from running an investment firm because his MIL might run for President? Makes perfect sense in Trumpworld, where's it cool to scam your Average Joe trying to get ahead by taking "courses" at his "University."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

Hillary has so many scandals, this one didn't make top one. Plus you have a crooked media.

Based on his investment record, he should be fired at a minimum and go scam at Clinton Foundation. How can he afford living in a 10 million dollar apartment when he loses 90% of assets?

I'm pretty sure he's not going to be "fired" from the investment firm he co-founded with two colleagues from Goldman Sachs. This wasn't their only hedge fund and its a safe bet he wasn't making investment decisions on his own. By the way, do you even understand how a hedge fund operates? Please don't continue to embarsss yourself with inane comments that are barely coherent comments.

I'm not the PP you're responding to here but stop trying to be an asshole about how much more vast your knowledge of hedge funds is than everyone else's. You're impressing fewer people than you think you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still waiting for all the self-proclaimed hedge fund experts to describe the exact nature of the alleged breach of fiduciary duty. They could also point us to evidence of a claim asserted against the hedge fund by an investor (or group of investors) or a coverage dispute between the fund and its insurer. It's hard to keep something like this under wraps for long in the financial world, particularly if there's a potential political angle.

** crickets **

Not sure you guys are getting it. It's potentially shady, even if he didn't violate his fiduciary duty under the law. Do you think all those investors would have given him the same amount of money even if he wasn't married to Chelsea? If not, why did they do it? Also, even if they feel ripped off after the fund blew up, do you really believe they will think it's in their best interest to go after Chelsea's hubby? Seems like they might just want to keep quiet for now and maybe look for a favor down the road when HRC is president.

Everything involving hedge funds is potentially shady. So, in theory, he is disqualified from running an investment firm because his MIL might run for President? Makes perfect sense in Trumpworld, where's it cool to scam your Average Joe trying to get ahead by taking "courses" at his "University."

If you want to talk about how Trump sucks, maybe start a different thread?