• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Dem. Chair Invested in Swiss Banks, Foreign Drug Companies, and the State Bank of Ind

Cowboy

Wait for it.
GOLD Site Supporter
I know, no big deal, but after suffering through her interview Sunday morning attacking Romney on the same issue, this is just more proof of how scatterbrained this bitch is. :hammer:


Disclosure forms reveal that Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a member of Congress from Florida, previously held funds with investments in Swiss banks, foreign drug companies, and the state bank of India. This revelation comes mere days after the Democratic chair attacked presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for holding money in Swiss bank accounts in the past.
Rep.jpeg



"Americans need to ask themselves, why does an American businessman need a Swiss bank account and secretive investments like that?" the DNC chair, a chief surrogate for President Obama's reelection team, said on Fox News Sunday two days ago. "Just something, a thought, that I'd like to leave folks with."

It's been a consistent theme of Obama's reelection strategy: Attack Romney for foreign investments he held, especially in Swiss bank accounts, "to try to promote his wealthy, out-of-touch businessman persona."
But disclosure forms reveal that in 2010, Wasserman Schultz invested between $1,001-$15,000 in a 401k retirement fund run by Davis Financial Fund. As the fund discloses, it is invested in the Julius Baer Group Ltd. and the State Bank of India GDR Ltd., as well as other financial, insurance, bank institutions.







"The Julius Baer Group is the leading Swiss private banking group, focusing exclusively on the demands of sophisticated private clients, family offices and external asset managers from around the world," its website explains. "Bank Julius Baer is the principal operating company of the Julius Baer Group, with origins dating back to 1890. The rich Swiss heritage becomes manifest in the values for which the Bank stands, e.g. trustworthiness, accountability, discretion and expertise. However, at the same time Julius Baer is a modern, forward-looking company at the leading edge of a genuine growth industry."


Similarly, according to disclosure forms from 2004, Wasserman Schultz had holdings in the Fidelity Advisor Overseas Fund. That fund is invested in HSBC bank (a British financial institution), Hengdeli Holdings (a Hong Kong watch company), Novo Nordisk (a Danish drug company), Volkswagen (a German auto company), Rakuten (a Japanese shipping business), Richemont Cie Financiere (a Swiss luxury goods company), and many others.

To be clear, there is nothing in Debbie Wasserman Schultz's disclosure forms to suggest that the DNC chair invested in anything illegal. But it is clear that some of her holdings had investments overseas, in Swiss banks, foreign drug companies, the state bank of India, and many other overseas holdings.
The hypocrisy, though, is clear: The Democrats, as well as President Obama, hope to paint Romney as an out of touch man for holding money in overseas bank accounts, when in reality their own chairman, Wasserman Schultz, had overseas investments.
All this comes in addition to Wasserman Schultz's refusal to disclose her own tax returns, despite continuously calling on Romney to do so.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...ug-companies-and-state-bank-india_648350.html
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
I don't think she is scatterbrained, I do think she is two faced and will say anything to help Obama win reelection. She has no logic to her arguments she just spouts off talking points one after another to get in all the jabs she can.

I do see Fox News and some News web sites responding to these types of attacks and calling them for what they are. However I do not see Romney doing a good job of being on the offensive. Even when he responds it leaves much to be desired. Reminds me of the McCain campaign. Obama and team is doing a great job of tearing down Romney and making him look bad, so bad that folks will be afraid to vote for him. Obama already has the vote of those on the government dole. That will get him 42% out the gate. All he needs is another 9% in the swing states and he's got him a 2nd term.

From what I see in the MSM and knowing so many people depend on that for their sole source of news I do think Obama has a damn good chance of winning that 2nd term. Makes me sick, but I see it coming. :(
 

Big Dog

Large Member
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Agreed Doc but I think Obama is plastering his ads a little too soon. He's spending a lot of money and Romney is raking in more money than Obama now. Look for a Romney ad barrage the month before the election, especially if the economy is as bad as it is now. I just think Romney is holding his cards close and waiting until he can do real damage closer to the election.
 

Av8r3400

Gone Flyin'
Judging by the campaign I have seen so far, Romney is just a place holder allowing Barry's reelection, plain and simple.
 

Cowboy

Wait for it.
GOLD Site Supporter
I don't think she is scatterbrained, I do think she is two faced and will say anything to help Obama win reelection. She has no logic to her arguments she just spouts off talking points one after another to get in all the jabs she can.

I do see Fox News and some News web sites responding to these types of attacks and calling them for what they are. However I do not see Romney doing a good job of being on the offensive. Even when he responds it leaves much to be desired. Reminds me of the McCain campaign. Obama and team is doing a great job of tearing down Romney and making him look bad, so bad that folks will be afraid to vote for him. Obama already has the vote of those on the government dole. That will get him 42% out the gate. All he needs is another 9% in the swing states and he's got him a 2nd term.

From what I see in the MSM and knowing so many people depend on that for their sole source of news I do think Obama has a damn good chance of winning that 2nd term. Makes me sick, but I see it coming. :(

I agree Doc but i never have been a fan of Romneys either. I have no faith in him IF he wins, doing anymore then "hopefully" not letting things get much worse for the next 4 years until we can get a "real" POTUS.

What bothers me is how long Obama has been campaigning ( 3 years now seems to me) and he has to still viciously attack his opponent, rather then run on what he has done. Surely he can come up with something thats not a flat out lie or BS that he has done thats "good" for this country, but I'll be damned if i can think of any. :unsure:

I know i have a short memory, but it sure seems to me that GW at least ran a much classier reelection campaign then this. But then again he "is" a classier person IMO. :wink:
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
The answer to Wasserman is John Sinunu. I bet if they let those two go at it on national TV, she'd be the looser.:whistling: I wouldn't miss the fireworks from that for anything.... I hope we get the chance to see that.:clap:

Regards, Kirk
 

tiredretired

The Old Salt
SUPER Site Supporter
Agreed Doc but I think Obama is plastering his ads a little too soon. He's spending a lot of money and Romney is raking in more money than Obama now. Look for a Romney ad barrage the month before the election, especially if the economy is as bad as it is now. I just think Romney is holding his cards close and waiting until he can do real damage closer to the election.

Yup. Did you notice that the Dems set a record raising money in the month of June? Something like 75 Million or so and got blown away by the Repubs 106 Million or so? If that trend hold true it can spell big trouble for the Obama campaign. They realize it now and are getting nervous but the big money is just not there for them anymore.

In 08 they blew McCain away in fundraising and it showed big time in the swing states. Not going to happen this time.

I bet the lamestram media would donate free air time to Barry if they thought they could get away with it.

The answer to Wasserman is John Sinunu. I bet if they let those two go at it on national TV, she'd be the looser.:whistling: I wouldn't miss the fireworks from that for anything.... I hope we get the chance to see that.:clap:

Regards, Kirk

I would gladly pay the price of admission to watch that. My God that would not only be entertaining but informative at the same time. That would be fun to watch. :yum:
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Agreed Doc but I think Obama is plastering his ads a little too soon. He's spending a lot of money and Romney is raking in more money than Obama now. Look for a Romney ad barrage the month before the election, especially if the economy is as bad as it is now. I just think Romney is holding his cards close and waiting until he can do real damage closer to the election.

I do hope you are right Dawg.
I am afraid that by Obama getting his message of lambasting of Romney out so soon that many will already be swayed and have no faith at all in Romney. His powers of persuasion can be strong if that is all a person listens to. And I fear those that only watch the MSM will hear Obama's message over and over and over again without him spending a penny since it is on the MSM news.

This could equate to a huge uphill battle for Romney since he will have to win them over somehow since many peoples minds will be filled with the BS that has been spouted by Obama for the past 6 months. It will cost Romney more to overcome that message.

I hope the majority of the American people are smarter than that, but evidence from the last election proves that Obamas oratory skills served him well and got him the white house.
 

jimbo

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Back to the original post, I don't understand why investing in foreign stocks or having foreign bank accounts is even an issue. Many of us on this forum have foreign investments, whether we know it or not. And all multinational companies have foreign bank accounts. They could not operate otherwise.

What the Republicans need to do is to go on the offensive and point out that Gummint Motors, GE, and most of Congress is guilty of the same. And keep hammering at it till the left shuts up. It seems to me that the right is too unwilling to offend. The left does not have that problem.

I too, think that Obama has at least a 50/50 chance of prevailing in November, and, with his record, he should be down 10 points. If he does not run on his record, the Republicans should.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Back to the original post, I don't understand why investing in foreign stocks or having foreign bank accounts is even an issue. Many of us on this forum have foreign investments, whether we know it or not. And all multinational companies have foreign bank accounts. They could not operate otherwise.

What the Republicans need to do is to go on the offensive and point out that Gummint Motors, GE, and most of Congress is guilty of the same. And keep hammering at it till the left shuts up. It seems to me that the right is too unwilling to offend. The left does not have that problem.

I too, think that Obama has at least a 50/50 chance of prevailing in November, and, with his record, he should be down 10 points. If he does not run on his record, the Republicans should.

Because the Dems, and particularly Wasserman/Shultz inssists on bringing it up when interviewed about the Romney candidacy. I have not seen a recent interview where she did not makeRomneys similar investments a class warfare issue. Suggesting that he is not in touch with "the people."

However, because Wasserman/Shultz is aliberal, she is. This despite the fact, her wealth and her investments are essentialy the same.


However, for the Koolaid Drinkers, it plays well.

Independents are more informed and like you have exhibited, understand the ploy. Seems they are going to the right on this issue. So Debbie is preaching to the choir here. Let us hope that choir keeps getting smaller and smaller.
 

jimbo

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Because the Dems, and particularly Wasserman/Shultz inssists on bringing it up when interviewed about the Romney candidacy. I have not seen a recent interview where she did not makeRomneys similar investments a class warfare issue. Suggesting that he is not in touch with "the people."

However, because Wasserman/Shultz is aliberal, she is. This despite the fact, her wealth and her investments are essentialy the same.


However, for the Koolaid Drinkers, it plays well.

Independents are more informed and like you have exhibited, understand the ploy. Seems they are going to the right on this issue. So Debbie is preaching to the choir here. Let us hope that choir keeps getting smaller and smaller.
I would agree about the independents being more informed, and I also think that they are the most misunderstood. If I were attempting to win a national election, I would forget the left and right, and concentrate on the middle. I think they are independent until they gather all the facts available, then make their decision. Obvious lies and misstatements do not, or at least should not, make the desired impression on this group.

It is also important to recognize what the middle doesn't like, and be sure to stay away from it, even if obviously baited.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
I would agree about the independents being more informed, and I also think that they are the most misunderstood. If I were attempting to win a national election, I would forget the left and right, and concentrate on the middle. I think they are independent until they gather all the facts available, then make their decision. Obvious lies and misstatements do not, or at least should not, make the desired impression on this group.

It is also important to recognize what the middle doesn't like, and be sure to stay away from it, even if obviously baited.

Maybe that is why Romney isn't rising to it.

Besides, whenever he does, he muffs it. Cheif Justice Roberts handed him the Obamacare tax on a silver Platter. We are talking a "T" ball set up. He couldn't figure out where to stand on it, much less swing at it, for a week.

The left was delighted
The right ws dissappointed.
I'm sure the independents were amused.
 

jimbo

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Maybe that is why Romney isn't rising to it.

Besides, whenever he does, he muffs it. Cheif Justice Roberts handed him the Obamacare tax on a silver Platter. We are talking a "T" ball set up. He couldn't figure out where to stand on it, much less swing at it, for a week.

The left was delighted
The right ws dissappointed.
I'm sure the independents were amused.
I agree. It seems the real problem with the right winning elections is the total lack of any ability to select a forceful candidate.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
I agree. It seems the real problem with the right winning elections is the total lack of any ability to select a forceful candidate.

Ronald Reagan's are few and far between. And the GOP base is realy about being Vanilla, not Rocky Road.


Romney has never been my guy. But he is what we have left.
 

EastTexFrank

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
"Just something, a thought, that I'd like to leave folks with."

I'll add the "nudge, nudge, wink, wink".

This is what disgusts me about today's politics. It's all half truths, lies and innuendo.

There's a difference between having an account in a foreign bank and owning stock in a foreign bank or any other foreign company, especially in a mutual fund, but so what?, they're both legal.

This woman is another head banger trying to manufacture controversy where none exists. Most people get so tired of this crap. I know that I am.
 

Cowboy

Wait for it.
GOLD Site Supporter
I'll add the "nudge, nudge, wink, wink".

This is what disgusts me about today's politics. It's all half truths, lies and innuendo.

There's a difference between having an account in a foreign bank and owning stock in a foreign bank or any other foreign company, especially in a mutual fund, but so what?, they're both legal.

This woman is another head banger trying to manufacture controversy where none exists. Most people get so tired of this crap. I know that I am.
I agree Frank, here is another case. :doh:


On the heels of The Weekly Standard’s report yesterday that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz — a vocal critic of Mitt Romney‘s investing practices, had herself dabbled in the foreign markets — we can add Nancy Pelosi to the list of prominent Democrats to profit from overseas investments.
According to Pelosi’s 2011 financial disclosure statement, the Democratic House Minority Leader received between $1 million and $5 million in partnership income from ”Matthews International Capital Management LLC,” a group that emphasizes that it has a “A Singular Focus on Investing in Asia.” A quick trip to the company website reveals a featured post extolling the virtues of outsourcing.
“Designed in California, Made in Manila” sounds like an excellent title for a smear ad to be run the by the Barack Obama campaign. Instead, it appears to be Nancy Pelosi’s investment strategy.
Pelosi is also a small investor in the embattled “Moduslink Global,” one of the “outsourcing pioneers” that Mitt Romney has been criticized for associating with while at Bain Capital.
It’s not surprising that a wealthy politician would invest globally (nor should it be considered problematic). This is interesting because of the attacks on Mitt Romney’s investments — because Obama purportedly believes in the virtues of “insourcing” and anti-globalization. (Obama appears to be running on a protectionist platform that went out of style with Canadian tuxedos)
Obama sure can preach the economic nationalism, but it doesn’t appear his fellow leaders and surrogates are buying the message.
If they aren’t, why should other Americans?



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/n...n-on-asian-investments-in-2011/#ixzz20Lf1oDL2
 

Catavenger

New member
SUPER Site Supporter
Maybe somebody here smarter than me can explain about the FDIC. I saw a reply to a Yahoo article about Romney having overseas accounts. Couldn't some of the reason for that be because he wants to protect his investments?
I looked here:​
http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/changes.html and saw this:
"On July 21, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law, which, in part, permanently raises the current standard maximum deposit insurance amount (SMDIA) to $250,000. The FDIC insurance coverage limit applies per depositor, per insured depository institution for each account ownership category"
Now isn't that for the total money someone has at each bank? I don't think that for example a person could have 10 accounts a the same bank and each account be insured for $250,000? But it says this "for each account ownership category" which confuses me more. In any case there are only so many FDIC insured banks in the USA and I would think that if one had enough money sooner or later he would run out of "insured" accounts.
So I would think that after that point it might be prudent and smart to have overseas assets.
I myself want someone who is prudent and smart as my President. It doesn't bother me that Romney is a wealthy man because to be that is a sign that he can manage money. I certainly do NOT want someone who can not manage money to be running MY country.

 
Top