This is who we nominated...more Clinton Foundation corruption (CNN)

[HerbChestnut]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/10/politics/hillary-clinton-donor-rajiv-fernando/index.html

Washington (CNN)A major political donor to the Clintons and other top Democrats was selected by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to serve on a key State Department intelligence board in 2011, despite having no clear background in the area, according to emails released this week.

Rajiv Fernando has donated $9,400 to Clinton's two White House bids -- first her 2008 run and again this year -- and has been a generous donor to Democrats running for the House and Senate and to President Barack Obama.

Fernando, a Chicago securities trader, has also been a prolific donor to the Clinton Foundation, giving at least $1 million to the organization, according to its website.

In July 2011, Fernando was appointed to a seat on the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB), a panel filled with top-level foreign policy advisers and security experts. Former Democratic presidential candidate Gary Hart chairs the current panel, which includes retired generals, the former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other high-ranking national security experts.

This guy was a *stock broker*... How on earth does that qualify him to have top secret security clearance? You can't make this stuff up.

[reformist2]

1. Old news! Recycled garbage!! Nothingburger! RW Smearjob!!!

Did I do that right?

[Jack Bone]

28. Date on the link says June 10th...that's fairly recent

on my calendar here in Indiana!

[Thinkingabout]

30. Article says 2011, not recent, just a rerun.

[JonLeibowitz]

35. This is the first reporting of this story. We got the 2011 emails via FOIA

[senz]

37. No, 2011 is when Hill appointed him to the board. She was SOS in 2011.

The emails that revealed it just came out this week.

[chillfactor]

2. good grief....

let it go already...5 more days and posts like yours will be blocked...thank goodness!

[HerbChestnut]

5. Why should this be blocked?

Tell me, why? This is an article from CNN posting a factual situation. Unless you can somehow refute the points made in the article, there's no reason something like this should be blocked from DU.

[leftofcool]

11. Probably because while factual, it does not give the entire picture.

[HerbChestnut]

14. Then please, fill us in on the part that CNN left out.

[JonLeibowitz]

36. *cricket*

[reformist2]

12. Negative talk could demoralize Hillary supporters, thereby helping Repugs!

Did I do that right?

[leftofcool]

15. We will never be demoralized.

We just think these silly posts that have been posted 50 times are just that.............silly.

[reformist2]

18. Exactly. How can we get demoralized, if we never read about any of Hillary's mistakes! It's perfect.

[leftofcool]

22. Sorry, Bernie lost. Hope you get it out of your system real soon

[Ned_Devine]

32. How is the story about the Clinton Foundation about Bernie?

[RazBerryBeret]

76. if it's not Heralding the Second Coming

aka HRC, then is somehow about Bernie, or because of Bernie.

[Ned_Devine]

80. Remember when this place was kind of fun and cool?

I kind of hate it here now.

[ChiciB1]

88. YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT IT ISN'T ABOUT BERNIE LOSING!

It's about opening OUR eyes and looking at REAL facts. Whether it was Bernie or any other candidate... THE FACTS REMAIN THE SAME!

Telling people to "get over" him losing just shows that trying to putting these facts into Nanna, Nanna, Boo, Boo tells me that REALITY to some means "Ignorance IS Bliss!"

Train wreck coming, but watching the crash is too horrible because we KNOW people WILL DIE!

[840high]

19. trumptrumptrump

[senz]

41. You did it beautifully!

[Maru Kitteh]

47. Because your title reads like I'm reading FreakRepublic or a Faux News message board

And the purpose of DU is not to engage in right-wing attacks on our candidate.

You'll learn quickly, or not.

[Cooley Hurd]

59. But constructive criticism will always be allowed...

1) CNN is an allowed source on DU
2) The article is not an opinion piece; it's reporting facts


If you think articles like the one in the OP are going to be magically pulled after June 16, you're going to be disappointed.

[thesquanderer]

79. I would think you're right, but not everyone agrees

Like you, I saw this as a legitimate news story, but when it was first posted on LBN, it was locked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141483781

[Cooley Hurd]

82. ...by a HRC supporter who has no business being a host of anything...

...if their bias gets in front of their job (volunteered, granted, but they have to abide by rules).

THAT particular host has done this repeatedly.

[Maru Kitteh]

81. The article yes, the straight-from-the-sphincter-of-FAUX-news choice of title

not so much.

If you think that kind of crap will fly after June 16, you're going to be disappointed.

[Cooley Hurd]

83. Title, no.

Content will be protected by long-established protocols (since 2001 - I've been here since 2002).

[Maru Kitteh]

86. Well whoopty-doo for you. I've been here since 2004.

So glad we agree that bullshit, right-wing, knuckle-dragging, straight from a Freeper latrine titles and sources (yes, this is CNN we know that) will not be tolerated soon. It will be an outstandingly welcome change.

[Cooley Hurd]

87. Great way to build a bridge...

No wonder your candidate is struggling in the GE polls.

...and I haven't had 5 hides EVER.

[HerbChestnut]

74. There's nothing "RW" about it. It's a factual article from CNN

Unless of course you deem *any* criticism a "RW attack"

[Lord Magus]

85. It's CNN, but it's sourced to literally Citizens United.

Yes, that Citizens United.

[reformist2]

10. I know, right? It will be like living in a protective bubble.

[senz]

39. And then you won't have to read any news about Hill's history.

I mean, why would you want information about someone who's running for president?

[elana i am]

3. i know right?

makes ya wonder if illegal insider trading is the purview of the ISAB or something.

ok that was supposed to be facetious but...

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. Another stupid post

[HerbChestnut]

7. Really? So you have counter evidence to what was stated in the article?

[The_Casual_Observer]

24. It's not worth arguing about. It's stupid on its face,

[senz]

40. Stupid that Hill rewards major donors with positions they're not

qualified for? Yes, I suppose it is stupid, but maybe she thought she'd get away with it.

[jalan48]

6. Pay to play baby!

[KingFlorez]

8. I know who we did not nominate

First name Bernie, last name Sanders. I really know how much it hurts to lose, but this becoming very sad.

[840high]

20. No reply to op?

[senz]

42. So that's how you respond to bad news about Hillary?

Put down Bernie and his supporters?

[NWCorona]

78. I except that Bernie lost and I'm not bitter about it.

That doesn't change this story tho.

[leftofcool]

9. He is not a stock broker

If you had bothered to read his resume, you would have found that he was the CEO of an international/global trading company which has very much to do with security. He is also quite knowledgeable in technology.

[HerbChestnut]

13. He's called a 'securities trader' right there in the article...

In fact, it's in the part I highlighted.

[leftofcool]

17. Try reading the man's actual resume.

I know that for some people that everything on the internets and in the media is true but I usually do my own actual research. It helps.

[HerbChestnut]

23. From Wikipedia (Because I can't view his entire profile on LinkedIn)

From 1991 to 2001, Fernando worked in trading positions at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and the Chicago Board of Trade.[5][7][8]

In 2002, Fernando founded Chopper Trading, a Chicago-based proprietary trading firm that concentrated in the areas of fixed income, equities, and other products.[9] The company has been regarded for their investments in technology, hiring highly qualified programmers, and for low employee turnover.[9][10] Under Fernando’s leadership, Chopper Trading had a presence on major U.S. exchanges including the CME, CBOT, NYSE, and internationally on the LSE, ICE, and Eurex.[7] As CEO, Fernando grew the company to over 200 employees, with offices in Chicago, New York, London, Munich, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.[7][11]

In January 2015, Fernando sold Chopper Trading to DRW Trading Group, another Chicago-based proprietary trading firm.[12][13]

In 2016, Fernando launched Scoutahead.com, an Internet start-up. Fernando currently serves as the Chairman and CEO of Scoutahead.com.[14][15]

As far as foreign policy is concerned, this is what was listed:

Raj Fernando serves on the board of directors for the American Security Project.[5] He also serves on the Foreign Policy Leadership Committee at the Brookings Institution and has been a member of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.[3][5]

Compared to some of the other people that have been given Top Secret security clearance, this seems pretty shallow...

[Arazi]

25. The IASB had him chucked off in 2 days, he was that unqualified

[JonLeibowitz]

38. His actual resume? You mean the one State Dept refused to give to a reporter for a story on Quals?

Do you have it??

[leftofcool]

61. It isn't up to the State Department to give out anyone's resume. That is up to the individual.

[reformist2]

60. In Hillaryland, he's not a "stock broker", he's a "securities reviewer"!

[AzDar]

16. ...

[Sparkly]

26. "conservative group Citizens United" -- nuff said.

"... email obtained by the conservative group Citizens United and released to CNN."

Cherrypicked, taken out of context, twisted into a contrived point.

Typical rightwing tripe.

[Gomez163]

27. Please leave

[senz]

43. Why? Don't you want to know what Hill did as SOS?

I thought you liked learning about your candidate.

[Maru Kitteh]

49. I see some of you are ALL FOR Citizens United

when it suits your purpose.

CU is not credible. If you don't know why, visit your local library and do some research. Unplugging would probably do you some good.

In the words of Ferris Beuhler,

it's over.

[senz]

51. This has nothing to do with Citizens United.

And please don't worry about my health, dear.

We don't know if it's "over," do we? She doesn't have the delegates yet and her status with the FBI remains precarious.

[Maru Kitteh]

52. Oh, it has EVERYTHING to do with CU.

And it's over.

SBS is going to suspend on Tues or Weds and shortly thereafter, endorse the nominee.

[leftofcool]

62. I guess ya'll progressives like CU now?

And yes, this has everything to do with CU.

[chascarrillo]

65. cough Clinton SuperPACs funded thanks to Citizens United ruling cough

[pinebox]

70. They dislike facts

They can't handle the truth so "please leave" is now a valid argument and thing to say apparently lol

[brooklynite]

29. FOUR Days to go...

[senz]

45. Four days until you won't have to know any more about your candidate?

Too bad you can't have other news outlets similarly censored.

It would be sad if everyone were well-informed but DUers.

[leftofcool]

63. This isn't a news outlet, It's a privately owned forum.

[pnwmom]

31. We didn't nominate the Clinton Foundation, and Hillary's connection there is as a donor.

She receives no income from the Foundation and doesn't even have a position on the board.

[unc70]

33. Never even sent any emails. Right?!

Last edited Sat Jun 11, 2016, 08:23 AM - Edit history (1)

ETA I am referring to her many foundation emails. Whether she was "employed" by the foundation, she was actively involved with it, some of her staff were employed by the foundation even after they were employed by the State Department (several for 6-8 months, one for 4 years), and her buddy Blumenthal was paid by the foundation.

BTW This guy is not a "security" export; he is an expert in doing really fast trading of "securities" (stocks, bonds, futures, derivatives, commodities) using computer systems for advantage. He is a specialized hedge fund manager.

[pnwmom]

34. Your days of being able to insult the Democratic nominee here are numbered.

Enjoy them while they last.

[senz]

44. Then why did she appoint a major Foundation donor to a position

for which he was entirely unqualified?

[pnwmom]

46. If you knew more about boards, you would understand

that they often include individuals who are experts in their fields but not connected to the organization's field.

Nick Merrill, Clinton's traveling press secretary, issued a statement.
"This was an unpaid, volunteer advisory board, and one of several foreign policy-focused organizations that he was involved with. As the State Department itself has said, the ISAB charter calls for a diverse set of experiences for its members. That's all there is to it."

[senz]

50. But the professional staff were baffled by it & then he had to resign

after the news got out.

Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.

The emails further reveal how, after inquiries from ABC News, the Clinton staff sought to “protect the name” of the Secretary, “stall” the ABC News reporter and ultimately accept the resignation of the donor just two days later.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

And you have no idea what I do and do not know about boards.

[pnwmom]

53. self-delete

Last edited Sat Jun 11, 2016, 03:23 AM - Edit history (1)

[senz]

55. LOL, I'm going to be generous and assume you're tired tonight, pnwmom.

Hill placed the generous Foundation donor on "a sensitive government intelligence advisory board" at State.

[pnwmom]

56. You're right, I misread that. Thanks for clarifying.

I still think we need more information because I understand he is an expert in computers and security, which could be relevant to that board.

[leftofcool]

77. He is/was an expert in the field of computer security

Which is why he would have been on the board. People with security clearances in that field do not give out information, most do not give out their names, especially if they work for or within the government. They do not throw around their resumes, they do not talk to staff about what they know of security in other countries and they do not talk about what they do with other board members.

[Arazi]

91. The IASB had him chucked off in 2 days, he was that unqualified

Did you read the article?

[randome]

68. No wonder I couldn't find salary information about this board. It's an unpaid position!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[leftofcool]

64. Citizens United says he was unqualified and you believe them. LMAO!

[Scuba]

69. "No income"? Bill got paid $500,000 by the foundation for a one hour speech. Then there's this ...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-28/government-watchdog-calls-clinton-foundation-slush-fund

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group once run by leading progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout. …

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. …

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.

In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.

[MFM008]

57. I remember the same crap

when he was President, they were "selling" access to the White House.
Letting friends sleep over in the Lincoln bedroom.
Whatever.
Are you telling me that NO politician ever appoints friends or donors to positions?
This isn't going anywhere.

[HerbChestnut]

75. Letting people sleep over in the White House is one thing...

Giving access to Top Secret national security information is another.

[George Eliot]

58. It's going to be a ruthless GE. So much on both sides to be outed.

Maybe I'll vacation in Canada for the next six months.

[think]

66. Only a few more days and we can ignore this corrupt behavior. Yay....

[Scuba]

67. That we KNOW she's vulnerable to blackmail and picked her anyway doesn't say much for us.

[randome]

71. With your 'special' knowledge, perhaps you should warn her about this, then.

As was pointed out above, the position is unpaid and voluntary. Hard to imagine someone being blackmailed over that!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Scuba]

72. What position? I didn't mention any position. Or any special knowledge.

[randome]

73. But you "know" she's subject to blackmail.

The OP was originally about her appointment of someone to an advisory board so I thought that was what you were referring to.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[bobthedrummer]

84. Two Clintons. 41 years. $3 Billion. Inside the Clinton Donor Network (WaPo 2015)

"Both Clintons declined to be interviewed or comment for this article."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money

K&R#44

[SCantiGOP]

89. Thanks for supporting the ticket in November

Or what is your motivation for this post?

[felix_numinous]

90. This slippery slope became obvious

when a 41 year coke addict from a prominent family was selected president in 2000--and NOTHING was discussed or done about that stolen election or to address the crimes that followed.