Biden's son and brother run hedge fund with links to Stanford
Filed under: Investing
Last week I questioned the campaign donations from Stanford to various presidential and congressional campaigns. This week we learn that Vice President Biden's son, Hunter, and his brother, James, run the Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund, which is jointly branded by the Bidens' Paradigm Global Advisors LLC and a Stanford Financial Group entity, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.A lawyer for the Bidens told the WSJ that, "There is no connection between the Bidens and Allen Stanford or Stanford period, full stop. There never was any meeting between any member of the Biden family, no phone calls, zero correspondence." The idea of zero correspondence may be a bit hard to believe if there is a jointly branded hedge fund. Don't you think there must have been something in writing to set up the deal?
The WSJ wrote that Stanford-related companies marketed the fund to investors and also invested about $2.7 million in the fund. The fund has offered to turn that money over to the receiver appointed last week by a U.S. District Court judge in Texas, who is taking control of the assets of Stanford and his companies.
Jeffrey Schneider, a marketer for Paradigm, says he brought in the Stanford business. He told the WSJ that Stanford introduced clients to the fund and Paradigm managed it. Paradigm's attorney Marc LoPresti said that Stanford entities put up the $2.7 million as seed money and then helped to market the new hedge fund, which was launched June 2007. As of November 2008, there were 104 investors and had assets of $49.8 million. The fund lost 9.5% in 2008 and is up 0.1% this year.
The purchase of Paradigm by the Bidens in 2006 had resulted in a lawsuit, which was settled between the Bidens and a former business partner Anthony Lotito in December. Lotito claimed there was money due him from the Bidens. He also claimed that James Biden asked for his help to get Hunter Biden out of the lobbying business while his father ran for President. A Biden lawyer denied Lotito's claim that the Paradigm purchase was prompted by Joe Biden's desire to get his son out of the lobbying business.
Whatever turns out to be the truth, it's obvious from this story and from the campaign contributions story of last week that Stanford has strong ties to people making key decisions in Washington today. Whether or not these ties helped Stanford to avoid SEC scrutiny needs to be investigated.
Lita Epstein has written more than 25 books including "Reading Financial Reports for Dummies."
Why is Oprah going to cable? Hint: It's nothing to get teary about
Kisses from Hershey: Candymaker may court Cadbury with $17 billion bid
D-Day for Harry Reid: Can he wrangle 60 votes for Senate health reform bill?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-24-2009 @ 11:46AM
Judy Lynn Clark Ferguson said...
Hunter and James are not Joe Bidden. Chelsea Clinton works for a Hedge fund but she is not Hillary or Bill. It appears Stanford was all over the place so he was a person in the financial institutions that could not be avoided by many. Many of your ex-legislators go into that Business and their is no reason to wonder why they become lobbyist and work for hedge funds there is or was big money that was manipulated fraudulent paper being passed around. Tell the American people the truth about the reason the stock market has dropped because they need to know the real truth. Now is the time for poor people to invest in the market if they are not too afraid to do so.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 7:51AM
BHarrison said...
Well Judy Lynn, if you are naive and gullible enough to not realize "how money is funnelled" through back door channels, then I guess that you represent those who will never "see the light" on how CORRUPTION is perpetrated. There can be a distinct difference between legitimate business and payoffs . . . sometimes there can be a thin line betwen the two though. As in WaterGate, Deep Throat's admonishions to "follow the money" is how these things are best discerned and determined.
When it turns out that a politician gets paid money for virtually "doing next to nothing", then it is a fairly sure bet that it is a "pay off". And if this can be connected to how a Congressperson votes on key issues, then it becomes rather unequivocally obvious. "None are so blind as those who simply refuse to see the truth . . ." If the shoe fits comfortably, then wear it . . .
2-25-2009 @ 11:13AM
BHarrison said...
"Time for poor people to invest in the markets"? . . . are you serious? The market is projected to drop another 10% to 30%, if not more, before it hits bottom. And even the professional "insider" fund managers have chosen to invest in zero interests T-Bills, rather than invest in the market. Perhaps I need to borrow your rose colored glasses to see some optimism in all of this. It is just going to take time to work through all of this.
2-25-2009 @ 6:50AM
Terri Castleberry said...
Doesn't matter. If we let the Bidens get away with this, what will happen next? The mafia in the White House? I feel Biden should resign and Obama re-considers a more honest pick for vice-president.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 6:51AM
Jerry said...
America is not taking this illegal money problems with polititians serious enough.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 6:51AM
Eugene said...
I'll bet a nickel that the SEC under Obama/Biden will NOT investigate this clear case of nepotism and corruption - guess why? This clown kid of his is programmed to be the NEXT Senator from Delaware. You elected these thugs!
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 6:51AM
John said...
Biden is a classic phony. Painted on smile, and he wants us to believe he is the everyday "Joe". Horseshit!! If it weren't for politics, this clown would be living under a freeway overpass.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 7:50AM
BHarrison said...
Hmmmmm . . . . per the article: ". . . Stanford introduced clients to the fund and Paradigm managed it. Paradigm's attorney Marc LoPresti said that Stanford entities put up the $2.7 million as seed money and then helped to market the new hedge fund, which was launched June 2007."
Well, you can call me cynical; however I certainly doubt that Stanford put up the "seed money" and established the business relationship "out of the kindness of his heart". To me this would appear as setting up a "back door" access to the Bidens, especially Joe Biden.
One would have to be rather naive and gullible not to see the "political connection" through such a business deal with "Stanford providing the "seed money"" . . . that is merely "buying access to Joe Biden" through his son and his brother.
So, in essence, and quite literally, Stanford lobviously set the Bidens up in business, steered business to them . . . and now they are trying to claim that there is "no connection" between Stanford and the Bidens". That is about as implausible of a story as I can imagine.
When are the American people going to "grow up" and quite acting like a bunch of naive high school kids? This is all about the business of "buying political influence". It is a total effrontery for the Bidens to attempt to claim "innocence" and deny any "connection" with Stanford. This is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
It is, what it is; and Joe Biden and his son and brother need to be held responsible and answerable for what has occurred. In my opinion, this is a perfect example of how Congressmen get PAID INDIRECTLY for their influence in political matters. The questions that arise are:
1. How did Joe Biden vote for the legislation that would have provided more regulations and oversight over the Stanford investment firms? Did he vote AGAINST the lesilation, which would be rather indicative of having "sold his vote" for the interests of Stanford and counter to the interests of the American people?
2. What, if any ownership or payments might Joe Biden have received from this business enterprise . . . either directly or indirectly? If there is any financial connection, then Joe Biden, in my opinion, would have, in essence, "sold his Congressional vote" for personal financial gain for his family and/or himself.
Haven't the American people seen enough of how they have been substantially fleeced and defrauded by our CORRUPT Congressmen. Now is NOT "the time to forgive and forget", NOW is the time to hold all of the CORRUPT Congressmen personally responsible and accountable for their CORRUPTION . . . and to throw the bums out of office as an example to other CORRUPT Congressmen who have no conscience.
NOW is the time for the American people to look out for the rights and interests of the American people as a whole.
So Joe, what's the answer to all of this? . . . And if you lie, you should be impeached.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 11:12AM
BHarrison said...
Well, we had reached the point where 3 out of 4 of the Obama political appointees had to withdraw due to tax "problems" (counting Caroline Kennedy, it may have been 4 out of 5; but that hasn't ever been clarified).
Now it looks like all of the Congressmen who might be appointed to various key positions (such as V.P., even though that is an elected position) are going to have to be careful about ALL of their past "business transactions/ dealings, and their political 'contributions'" in the past . . . . and it is too late to try to cover up what has been established long ago. The fall out from the financial frauds is going to make it diffiuclt for a lot of the "established Congressmen . . . I'm sure that many Congressmen are sweating out having a lot of "past issues", that they thought had been buried, resurrected by the financial scandals.
As is said: "The most dangerous man in the world, especially in politics, is a truly honest man who cannot be bought off or intimidated into questionable compromises." That kind of man is feared more by the politicians than any other man . . . and I personally doubt that there is a man, or woman, in Congress who would qualifiy as a "truly honest person".
Our nation has been "sold out" to the point of financial disaster and collapse by the CORRUPTION of our Congresses. The basic problem is that our two major political parties are controlled behind the scenes by the speicial intersts groups and ultra wealthy. That is how 3% of our population reportedly owns and controls 90% of the wealth of our nation. it is time to break this economic strangle hold that is based on corruption.
If the government taxes these elitists SUPER RICH, where are they going to take their wealth to? The whole world is engulfed in this global recessions/Depression; and are they going to risk their weath in even more corrupt foreign nations? I don't think so. The safest place for these ultra wealthy is right here in the USA. Like the CORRUPT CEOs, if they don't like it in the USA, then where are they going to go?
It is time for a capitlalist "redistribution of some of this ill gotten wealth through taxation of the ultra wealthy.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 11:14AM
BHarrison said...
"The SOLUTION" for most of our problems is relatively simple, conceptually. That solution is simply to INSTILL INTEGRITY into our business enterprises and politics, in as much as possible.
This can be achieved by:
1. Issuance of NEW REGULATIONS that require full disclosure, transparency, and integrity of FI and corrporations financial statements.
2. Effective objective oversight of FIs, corporations, and the markets.
3. Requiring that oversight agencies refer discovered apparent "irregularities" that are not in their domain to the other apropriate oversight agencies.
4. Requiring that ALL major corporations and upper level government office holeders (Congressmen, etc.) provide audited financial statements annually; and that the auditing firms must be changed every two years minimally. (That would just be part of the "costs" of holding public office; and the costs could be an "expense item" that would be paid for by the government . . . the costs of keeping our government "honest".
5. There should be diligent indictment and prosecution of corporate officers and politicians who are found to be involved in any malfeasance or fraud.
6. The corporate CEOs' compensations should be locked into the long term profitabillity of their cororations (as is being proposed even now by some Congressmen).
Well, even all ofthat will not be "perfect"; but it would go a long way in cleaning up a lot of CORRUPTION. And to those who would bemoan the costs of these measures, and the potential "intrusion into private finacial matters", I can only point out that the lack of these "standards and requirements" has resulted in the economic collapse of our nation . . . which may even become a lot worse than it is now. So, we can either "pay the costs" of ensuring the stability and integrity of our business enterprises and government officials OR we can suffer the demise that we are currently going through.
And, personally, I doubt that we can ever "clean up governemtn" without these standards and requirements.
Reply