Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (62409)	12/19/2011 2:48:14 PM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Pelosi the Crook ................................................................................................................................................... Banking expert praised by Pelosi was also a major family business partner 12/19/11 by Will Rahn dailycaller.com During her tenure as speaker of the House, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi invited investment banker William Hambrecht to participate in multiple economic meetings with her party’s leadership without revealing her extensive personal and financial relationship with him. The links between Hambrecht and Pelosi are a matter of public record. Hambrecht was Pelosi’s son’s boss between July 2009 and September 2011. Pelosi’s husband, Paul, has holdings in a half-dozen companies linked to Hambrecht. The Pelosis purchased a team in Hambrecht’s nascent United Football League for $12 million in 2009, just days before the then-speaker invited Hambrecht to participate in an economic forum and press conference. At the press conference, Pelosi introduced Hambrecht and several others as “leading economists,” telling reporters they would talk about “some of their forecasts that they told us about — some of the options that we may have in investments, in tax policy, in budgetary overview, on how we create jobs in the most fiscally sound way.” According to Roll Call, which first reported this story, Pelosi did not disclose her relationship with Hambrecht on that occasion or any other time, and was not required to do so by House rules. Not all of the Pelosis’ investments with Hambrecht — a major Democratic donor — were successful. One, however, earned Paul Pelosi between $100,000 and $1 million in 2010, and a brokerage account he held with Hambrecht’s firm is worth somewhere between $500,000 and $1 million. “Bill Hambrecht has been an intellectual resource on both sides of the Capitol,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill told Roll Call. “In these meetings, Hambrecht has spoken about the need, in light of the financial crisis, to help keep homeowners in their homes, help small businesses grow and hire, and help small banks gain access to credit — all macroeconomic goals to grow and stabilize our economy and strengthen our competitiveness.” While Pelosi’s behavior was legal, and although she never illegally called him as a witness at a hearing, Roll Call also reports that the Pelosis invested between $50,000 and $100,000 in a clean energy firm on the first day stock was sold in the company. That company, Clean Energy Fuels Corp., had its initial public offering of stock managed by Hambrecht’s firm. That investment doesn’t seem to have turned a profit for the Pelosis so far, and part of the reason is because legislation known as the NAT GAS act — a bill that would have provided federal subsidies for natural gas vehicles that could be refueled at stations the company produces — never made its way through Congress. “We were disappointed in 2010 when the Nat Gas act, which was structured to help promote natural gas vehicle deployment in the United States, failed to move through Congress. … The Legislation would be good since it would accelerate the deployment of vehicles, but our business is not dependent on it and we continue to move forward without it,” Clean Energy Fuels Corp. reported in its 2010 annual statement. Although the NAT GAS act is listed on Pelosi’s website as part of the Democrats’ “Make It In America” agenda, Hammill told Roll Call that she does not support the legislation. “Leader Pelosi opposes the larger NAT GAS legislation in its current form because she doesn’t believe we need to subsidize natural gas at this level given that it is so plentiful,” he told Roll Call. “The legislation is a very large subsidy of up to $9 billion.” Pelosi did, however, vote for a bill that included some of the subsidies included in the NAT GAS act. Again, her support of that bill was legal because House rules only forbid members from voting on bills that would financially benefit only themselves, and in this case, Pelosi’s vote would benefit all investors in natural gas companies — not just her family. “This investment was made in 2007, and we reject the idea that Leader Pelosi would act in the Congress upon an investment,” Hammill told Roll Call. “Leader Pelosi has long said that our energy independence is critical to our national security and economic security. … Obviously, natural gas burns cleaner than other fossil fuels and will be part of our energy mix for the foreseeable future.” Hammill did not respond to an email from The Daily Caller asking for further comment.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (62409)	12/19/2011 3:02:42 PM
From: joseffy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

‘The Taliban, Per Se, Is Not Our Enemy’: VP Biden’s Jaw-Dropping Gaffe .............................................................................................................................. December 19, 2011 by Buck Sexton theblaze.com Joe Biden has a long history of verbal flubs, but this one may take the cake. ‘The Taliban, per se, is not our enemy,” Biden said. That’s right. The Vice-President of the United States, initially added to the Obama campaign to add foreign policy gravitas to the ticket, has come out and questioned whether the Taliban are our enemy. Let’s get right to the context, which the media will inevitably hype in an effort to conflate an amazing gaffe with straight-talkin’, straight-shooting’ foreign policy from the VP. Biden was answering questions from Les Gelb for a Newsweek interview, the full text of which you can read here. The subject matter of the interview ranged considerably across the foreign policy spectrum from Afghanistan to Iran and China. But it was on Afghanistan that the Vice President uttered the particularly shocking line about the Taliban. Biden was apparently addressing the reconciliation process in Afghanistan, which could mean a brokered peace with the Taliban. Specifically, he said: “Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy. That’s critical. There is not a single statement that the president has ever made in any of our policy assertions that the Taliban is our enemy because it threatens U.S. interests. If, in fact, the Taliban is able to collapse the existing government, which is cooperating with us in keeping the bad guys from being able to do damage to us, then that becomes a problem for us.” Biden’s timing is interesting, as a controversial sections of the “National Defense Authorization Act” have made their way through Congress that specifically cite the Taliban. Dubbed by critics as the “Indefinite detention bill” over fears it could strip U.S. citizens of their right to due process and a civilian trial, the Taliban comes up in detainee sections. Under NDAA section 1031, for example, the language on detainee status reads: “A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.” So the vice president claims the Taliban is not really a U.S. enemy. But a bill just passed Congress says any form of support to the Taliban would effectively make anyone a terrorist stripped of their civilian rights and detained indefinitely under military jurisdiction. It seems pretty clear that’s because the Taliban is a U.S. enemy, apart from any concerns of the NDAA itself. Add that to the fact that U.S. soldiers are killing — and being killed by — Taliban fighters every day, and have been for 10 years, and you have a truly monumental gaffe even by Biden standards.