3 ms·
I read the article, because it's at such variance with the official version. I have no idea how close to reality it is. My gut feeling is that your skepticism i
by PhantomGremlin 11y ago
I read the article, because it's at such variance with the official version. I have no idea how close to reality it is. My gut feeling is that your skepticism is justified.
would probably bring Hillary's political hopes crashing to ground
Here we disagree. To put it crudely: NOBODY GIVES A FUCK!
Let's look at something IMO much more serious, Hillary's prowess at trading commodities.[1] She supposedly makes a cash deposit of under $1,000 into a trading account, and through a series of quite astute trades walks away with about $100,000 (about $323,000 in today's money) in about ten months, all as part-time activity.
As someone summarized it:
Only four explanations can account for
these remarkable results.
1) Blair may have been an exceptionally
good trader.
2) Hillary Clinton may have been
exceptionally lucky.
3) Blair may have been front-running
other orders.
4) Or Blair may have arranged to have a
broker fraudulently assign trades to
benefit Clinton's account.
Unless she was one of the greatest "amateur" commodities traders of all time, this was nothing more than a bribe to the Governor and First Lady of Arkansas.
But, like I said, NOBODY GIVES A FUCK. As Wikipedia put it: "There were no official investigations of the trading and Clinton was never charged with any wrongdoing."
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_...
- nl 11y agoNobody gives a fuck because there's no story. It was a long time ago and the combination of Blair being good and Clinton being lucky. They all made money, Clinton got out of the market before Blair, and then Blair went on to lose money.
- PhantomGremlin 11y agothe combination of Blair being good and Clinton being lucky Did you read the Wiki? Someone did some calculations of the "luck" involved: Using a model that was stated to give the hypothetical investor the benefit of the doubt, they concluded that the odds of such a return happening were at best 1 in 31 trillion For comparison, current Powerball odds are a mere 1 in 175 million. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerball#Payout_and_odds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerball#Payout_and_odds
- nl 11y agoYeah. If you calculate the odds on any given combination of trades they are frequently vanishingly rare. Lottery wins are incredibly unlikely too, and yet people win them.
- mercer 11y agoYes, but if the person winning the lottery is part of the lottery company, or has connections to it, a lot of suspicion seems warranted.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]