Edwards was supposedly at Fortress learning about Hedge Funds so unless he's stupid

[KittyWampus]

he should have learned what the fuck hedge funds are and had some familiarity with what Fortress was and what it was investing in and buying up.

This is about investment groups buying up bundled up bits and pieces of mortgages from banks. RISKY stuff.

And Edwards has condemned this practice and yet was invested in it.

And to say he didn't know what Fortress was about is ridiculous since he claims to have gone on the payroll of Fortress TO LEARN ABOUT THE HEDGE FUND BUSINESS>

See the hypocrisy?

It doesn't matter that he even knew or didn't know about the NOLA bits and pieces because even if it wasn't NOLA, but the very nature of a Hedge Fund it was somewheres or something else equally risky or ultimately unsavory.

[screembloodymurder]

1. Bull

Do you know what securities your MM invests in?

[KittyWampus]

2. Yes, Vanguard sends out a list. But I did not join Vanguard to LEARN ABOUT HEDGE FUNDSl

Edwards did.

And my Money Market fund is invested in SAFE, low risk stuff.

When I choose my funds I purposely chose low risk even thought the yield was less.

[trumad]

4. Nope---and most don't...

Just cannon fodder for idiots....

[KittyWampus]

5. Are you suggesting people invest in money markets blindly? That is ludicrous. You CHOOSE what fund

or what type of fund your money is going into.

When I invested in Vanguard they had several options from low risk/low yield to high risk/high yield.

To suggest Edwards didn't know what types of things Fortress was investing in when he joined SPECIFICALLY to learn about Hedge Funds is beyond ridiculous.

[trumad]

6. Yep

[KittyWampus]

8. You obviously never have bought into a money market. You don't just hand in money

and say "here, invest this". Unless you are really stupid.

SBy extension then, Edwards is stupid.

[trumad]

10. Bought into them all my working life...

and I'm pretty certain that at times, I missed a few of those that my broker put me in. BUT in a perfect world, one that you must live in---- we'd know everything, now wouldn't we. UGG!

[pitohui]

13. yeah same here, who has time to read all that crap?

edwards has a real job, ya know?

even i, with way fewer responsibilities, never read all that blah blah

i could be invested in roasting small children for their fat and i'd never have a clue

i bet if i stopped every DUer on the street and asked what her money market was invested in, not one, not ONE would have an accurate report

can we move on now?

[trumad]

15. Look the deal is ---if a DUer has an agenda, they post crap like this.

[KittyWampus]

18. You put up millions for high risk hedge funds? Again, this isn't about knowing each singular

investment your fund buys.

It's about knowing what type of fund you are buying into.

Risky/high yield or safe/low yield.

[KittyWampus]

17. You didn't instruct your broker to go for low-medium-high yield? And this is irrelevant anyway

And this is pretty much irrelevant anyway because Edwards SPECIFICALLY joined to learn about hedge funds.

And I just realised you've thrown up a straw man.

This isn't about knowing exactly each and every investment the fund you've bought into makes. It's about knowing the basic type of fund you are buying into.

Again, if you are going to claim Edwards had no idea what type of fund he put his money in, and what the risk factor was and what the yield factor would be then he is stupid.

Because he went to work at Fortress to learn about those very things.

[trumad]

19. Strawman---LOL

It's better than just making up shit. You have no idea what Edwards knew.....

[KittyWampus]

22. He's the one who claims to have joined Fortress to learn about Hedge Funds and then invested in them

You are trying to suggest he DIDN'T know what he was getting his money into?

He just gave Fortress a couple of million and said do whatever you like?

Investors have to choose what kind of fund they put their money in.

When you sign the forms.

So you say Edwards signed forms with no knowledge of what he was signing.

[youthere]

12. I do..

I get a list every quarter.

[pitohui]

14. yeah and do you READ the list?

because if you do you got too much time on your hands :-)

[KittyWampus]

20. yeah, and you just fork over money to a broker without specifying high or low risk

Edwards, btw, specifically joined Fortress to learn about Hedge Funds.

So he didn't know what TYPES of things his money would be going into?

Then he's an idiot.

[youthere]

31. Actually I do..

One of the reasons we chose the funds that we did was because they boast of "socially responsible investing" ..so my husband and I make damn sure they do.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. I still like him better than Hillary or Obama

but less than I did before. :(

[ClassWarrior]

7. Wow, Edwards lives in a fucked-up system?? Damn him!!

:eyes:

NGU.

[Mythsaje]

9. It would sure be convenient for the PTBs

if he gave them his money, said "okay, I don't want to invest in these kinds of things" and then, against his orders, someone took his money and did precisely what he told them not to do.

Thank God there aren't any sleazy Republicans in the world of finance who might do such a thing.

[rwheeler31]

11. Oh get over yourself.

Very few people know what they are invested in. They try to keep it Quiet.

[KittyWampus]

21. Edwards didn't know the TYPE of fund he invested in and how risky it was? After supposedly learning

abut that very thing at that very company?

How can you suggest that with a straight face and expect anyone to believe it?

[GreenTea]

34. Man, is this a hit thread....Now, who are you voting for again?

[Tinksrival]

16. and very few people know who they are voting for.

it's the American way doncha know.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

23. One would think that someone with high political aspirations..

Would keep better track of just where their investments might be than Jane or Joe Sixpack..

It's not like this is the first time a politician has been embarrassed by where his money has been.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rwheeler31]

26. Hmmm

Why are
they afraid?

[rjones2818]

28. It's a legitimate news story.

John apparently had some idea (or at least was tipped off to it - see the washington post article that's being linked on several of the threads) back in may. The question begs to be answered: what did he know in may, did it take him three months to find out about what was going on, etc. Remember, he was not only invested in the company, he made over 470,000 dollars from them as salary and their execs gave over 150,000 dollars to his campaign. It may all be hunky dorey, but it looks rather like it's not. And if he can't answer the dems well, what do you think the repugs will do with this should he be nominated?

[KittyWampus]

29. Anti-Edwards? If the reality of a situtaion makes him look bad it's because of those

pointing out the facts?

You can't even refute the facts.

And I haven't decided on a candidate yet.

[GreenTea]

35. No because only a fool would not investigate another John Solomon hit piece!

Another John Solomon hitpiece on Edwards



By now, you'd think someone at WaPo would wise up about John Solomon and his tendency to only attack Democrats in his pieces about "corruption." You know, his tendency to target legitimate transactions as being somehow corrupt because they were linked at eighth hand to some dirty person.

Well, he's at it again. After his attempted smear of Edwards over his real estate transactions failed, now Solomon attempts to tie him to actions of his employer, Fortress Investment Group.

We'll deconstruct this garbage below the fold....

The hedge fund that employed John Edwards markedly expanded its subprime lending business while he worked there, becoming a major player in the high-risk mortgage sector Edwards has pilloried in his presidential campaign.

Edwards said yesterday that he was unaware of the push by the firm, Fortress Investment Group, into subprime lending and that he wishes he had asked more questions before taking the job. The former senator from North Carolina said he had asked Fortress officials whether it was involved in predatory lending practices before taking the job in 2005 and was assured it was not.

In the first sentence, Solomon is already trying to make Edwards look like a hypocrite. He has no shame, does he?

Oh, but wait, there's more.

Fortress and its partners bought Green Tree in 2003. According to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in April, its holding in Green Tree was as high as $492.4 million at the end of 2005 -- 4 percent of Fortress's holdings at the time.

Last July, Fortress expanded its stake in the industry by buying Texas-based Centex Home Equity, a top-25 subprime lender, for an estimated $540 million. In December, Centex Home Equity, now called Nationstar Mortgage, bought the loan-origination division of Champion Mortgage, bringing another subprime lender into the Fortress portfolio.

In March, Newcastle Investment Corp., a real estate investment trust managed by Fortress, announced that it, too, was moving into the subprime market with the purchase of a $1.7 billion loan portfolio. Also in March, Fortress bought about $4 billion in subprime loans from Fremont General Corp.

Now, there are five transactions listed here by Mr. Solomon. Only one of the five took place while Edwards was with the firm. In 2003, he was running for president. By December of last year, he was running again. Basically, Solomon is attempting to tie Edwards to actions he did not participate in and tar him as a liar when it comes to his advocacy for the poor, advocacy that no other major party candidate has done since Bobby Kennedy in 1968. Solomon's guise here is that a company that Edwards worked for made transactions in a field that Edwards has declared himself against, even though the vast majority of those transactions did not take place during Edwards' tenure there, and three of the five took place after he left to run for president. It's pathetic that this was even allowed in the WaPo.

We've talked a lot about what the media is going to do to our candidates in 2008. All those years of Republican one-party power has clearly prejudiced the Beltway press. The problem is, reality clearly demonstrates it's the Republican party who is thoroughly corrupt. The stenographers that make up the Beltway media have taken it upon themselves to simply invent shit to try and achieve the "balance" that the unbalanced Fox News screams about every night, instead of following the reporter's credo, which is to tell it like it is.

I went to a major university and learned the ins and outs of journalism through classes, writing, and editing the student newspaper. Not once did I come across a credo that told me I should make up things as I go to create a false "balance" to please the people who were in power (and let's remember, they aren't in power anymore). Every time this happens, we need to call them out on it and let them know that we expect better and that we will find people who truly understand the responsibility and public trust they are charged with if they are unable to stop behaving as if this is the Republican monarchy.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/11/175756/450

[madfloridian]

44. SO that's why the OP took out the link.

Because it was a Solomon hit piece. He did one after the other in 04. We all fell for them then. We should know better now.

[NYCGirl]

47. Here's a story in the NY Times (which Murdoch has sworn to put out of business):

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/us/politics/18edwards.html?ex=1345089600&en=97bc9fa2a7538476&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[tkmorris]

25. I love threads like these

It lets me know who doesn't want Edwards to succeed and furthermore who is willing to engage in destructive tactics to take him down.

Useful information that.

[rwheeler31]

27. You got it.

Thanks

[Blackhatjack]

32. I started making a list of anti-Edwards posters long ago & watch them reappear regularly here...

... saying things like "I actually like the guy but..." or "I was considering Edwards but now..."

YEAH RIGHT!

They post negative comments about Edwards and then pretend they are just being objective and impartial and recently changed their mind about him. NOT.

but if you point out they have posted negatively against Edwards in the past, they will accuse you of all kinds of things, like 'following them..' or 'stalking them...'

And what is funny is they think no one notices.

Right.

[GreenTea]

36. Exactly right, like republicans on talk shows, say the same thing before they begin trashing a Dem!

[cgrindley]

40. Go ahead, Nixon, you keep that enemies list

I don't like Edwards. He had his chance and blew it. It's someone else's turn. I like Clinton, Obama and Dodd. I don't care who knows that I like Clinton, Obama and Dodd. But I don't like Edwards. Or Kucinich (he's just an irritating distraction).

[Blackhatjack]

50. Sorry , you did not make the list, you never pretended to like Edwards....

I don't have an enemies list, it is just helpful to recall who is being genuine who is pretending.

[cgrindley]

30. Edwards really doesn't care

his grotesque fortune came from a really shitty line of business. I doubt he really gives a shit about anyone or anything. The NYT has a good story on his unethical investments in today's paper. Hillary and Obama on the other hand, are behaving well.

[goodgd_yall]

37. Edwards announced giving up investment in Fortress.

[tammywammy]

38. But he was told about Fortress and foreclosures

back in May. He should have divested himself of it back then.

[cgrindley]

39. According to the NYT, he's not divesting himself of it 100%

he's keeping a lot of money in one of its interests.

[tammywammy]

41. hum

do you have a link to that story? This just doesn't sound good for Edwards any way you spin it.

[cgrindley]

42. Here's the quotation and link

Here's a quotation:

The campaign confirmed, however, that Mr. Edwards would keep $16 million of his $30 million net worth in Fortress, a private equity fund with $43.3 billion in assets. The fund accepts investments only from institutions and wealthy individuals.

Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/us/politics/18edwards.html?ex=1345089600&en=97bc9fa2a7538476&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[tammywammy]

46. Thanks!

I hadn't read that article yet. This whole thing is going to be a mess for Edwards. Doesn't sound good to me at all.

[cgrindley]

48. I suppose he'll totally divest tomorrow

unless he's an idiot, which he isn't. I just don't know how he's going to explain the whole member of the board thing. If Katrina had ever been mentioned at one of those meetings, he should say so now. If it never was, that's fine, but if it was and he doesn't come clean, he's over.

[tammywammy]

49. I agree

He needs to totally divest now. He's not who I'm pulling for in the primaries right now, but I'd hate to see something like this sink him and it can. :shrug: If I was a big supporter I'd be really worried with this news.

[Adelante]

51. Member of the board of Fortress?

Wow. I hadn't seen that.

[goodgd_yall]

45. Oh, that's not good

Didn't know this.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

[Guaranteed]

43. No, I don't see any "hypocrisy" there.

I think you mean "contradiction."