To my knowledge, the normal “insider trading” laws don’t apply to congress. However, they do have to report trading, and every single one of their financial disclosures should be reviewed, and a list of those keeping their own asses/pocketbooks safe on intel briefing on 1/24/2020 should be public. Take a walk of shame as they leave the public trough...

In the Face of Pandemic, the U.S. Senate Sells Stocks and Plays Politics With Our Lives

On Thursday night, news broke of two Republican Senators, Richard Burr of North Carolina and Kelly Loeffler of Georgia, dropping some serious stock after an all-Senators meeting where they received a briefing on the Wuhan coronavirus. We’re talking stock sales in the millions.

It’s an egregious abuse of power, if this is a case of insider trading, and there are calls from all over for both of them to resign. Tucker Carlson even lit Burr up on his show and demanded he resign. It’s a bi-partisan thing right now, because we’re in the middle of a pandemic and American citizens are terrified. What do these two do when they catch wind of how bad it’s going to be? They get rich off of the crisis.

For Loeffler’s part, she says the transactions were made by a third party broker, and she was not aware of the sale until weeks after.


Senator Kelly Loeffler
✔
@SenatorLoeffler
· 7h
This is a ridiculous and baseless attack. I do not make investment decisions for my portfolio. Investment decisions are made by multiple third-party advisors without my or my husband's knowledge or involvement.

Senator Kelly Loeffler
✔
@SenatorLoeffler
As confirmed in the periodic transaction report to Senate Ethics, I was informed of these purchases and sales on February 16, 2020 — three weeks after they were made

I have supported Loeffler’s re-election bid in Georgia, and I’ve done it right here at RedState. I’m not a fan of Doug Collins, and I’m not suddenly doing a 180 on this. But there needs to be full disclosure here, and Loeffler and Burr both need to explain this fully. There needs to be enough evidence that can fully clear this, because it looks bad.

If she and Burr did do this based on insider information, I hope they are prosecuted for it. However, while they are certainly egregious actors in this, I find it highly unlikely they would be the only ones. I fully expect – and maybe hope just a bit – that more people in government will be implicated.

The timeline here, though, brings to light so many more questions that the American public needs answers to, and they need them immediately.

This briefing that Loeffler and Burr (allegedly) based their stock sales from was held on January 24. On January 31, President Donald Trump banned all travel to and from China. Clearly, he was informed that something major was going on. So if this briefing that the every U.S. Senator apparently got was dire enough to make the greediest go out and make big financial decisions over it, why in God’s name did Democrats attack Trump for stopping travel to and from China?

If every Senator was indeed at that meeting, why did Chuck Schumer go and politicize Trump’s move in order to score a political point? Why did other Democrats follow suit?

This seems not just irresponsible, but dangerous to the American public. Chuck Schumer played politics with Americans’ lives in order to try and attack Trump for making what was ultimately the right move.

There is a pandemic going on. It is so important that some people apparently realized it would tank certain stocks. So, naturally, Schumer’s first move is to attack the Republican President for the actions he took in trying to mitigate the virus’s impact in America. Absolutely brilliant.

Let’s also not forget that each of these Senators knew enough about how bad it was going to be that they decided to make these decisions at our expense… months before we knew how bad it was going to be. And not one of them thought “Hey, the American public really needs time to prepare for this. Don’t go panicking them or anything, but maybe just get the word out now so we can take steps.”

Instead, it appears every one of them played their own little games with the information and left us to fend for ourselves.

That’s not governance. That’s recklessness in the face of a threat that will cost many Americans their livelihoods (if not their lives). But, that’s how Washington D.C. has chosen to operate. That is how they have decided to live their lives.

You should not be forgiving of anyone here. Demand that they own up and take responsibility for what they’ve done to a country they are supposed to be governing. In the face of a life-threatening pandemic, they have forsaken the people that put them into office.

At this point? Maybe just fire them all and start over.


https://www.redstate.com/joesq...itics-with-our-lives


Also at:


https://www.breitbart.com/poli...ronavirus-briefings/


https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...-coronavirus-crisis/

This message has been edited. Last edited by: feersum dreadnaught,

Reports are Feinstein from KA got in on that action as well.

To me there's a fine line between having observed the economic effect of the virus in China and selling your stocks or calling it quasi insider trading. Everyone saw what was going on in China and could have done the same thing. Really, considering the reluctance of the U.S. government to be pro-active and inherent freedom of movement of the population compared to an authoritarian China it was a no brainer to dump stocks.

Sounds more like sour grapes from people who didn't see the writing on the wall.

In theory, they had put this stuff into a blind trust sort of situation, but I bet many made calls.
For those that wonder how politicians get so rich working on a small salary in high overhead Washington, this helps explain why and how.
Don't think they didn't tell other family members and close friends either.
And there's more than one or two, probably one or two that didn't do this sort of stuff.

A while ago, I am 95% sure I read that congress critters can't be accused of insider trading.

One reason they all get rich while in office.

EDIT: Looks like they changed that in 2012 with a new law. I'm sure they still do it - it's just a little riskier now. They have to come up with some plausible reason they would have known that info otherwise..

I have LONG thought Burr needed to be replaced. His chairmanship of the Senate Intel committee has been disastrous. Hasn't lifted a finger to expose corruption or fight the coup.

This did give me a chuckle though.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
I have LONG thought Burr needed to be replaced. His chairmanship of the Senate Intel committee has been disastrous. Hasn't lifted a finger to expose corruption or fight the coup.

Why would he expose himself and his cronies?

quote:

Originally posted by SBrooks:
A while ago, I am 95% sure I read that congress critters can't be accused of insider trading.

One reason they all get rich while in office.

EDIT: Looks like they changed that in 2012 with a new law. I'm sure they still do it - it's just a little riskier now. They have to come up with some plausible reason they would have known that info otherwise..

The way it was explained to me is that at one time congress critters were exempt from insider trading law, they made big $$$. Then there was enough political flak that congress passed a law removing the exemption.

But then they realized how much $$$ they were loosing, the law was modified, it was still illegal, but effectively they will no longer have anyone assigned to investigate such illegalities. Kind of like posting a speed limit sign then telling police officers to stay away.

I thought the law change was that staffers can no longer insider trade, but the "anointed" could...

The solution is rope. lots and lots of rope.

I would have thought that 'accusation=guilt' reaction might have been put to bed after the Kavanaugh nonsense.

Silly me.

Public figures are constrained about what they can and should say in a crisis, to avoid promoting/creating panic.

Dozens of explanations possible. Scheduled transactions; part of a portolio rebalance; managed by others and not their decision, .... Wait to hear them? Nah, the media's in feeding frenzy mode. And I note that the thread title omits Dianne Feinstein (D) - what's with that?

Personally, I'd argue that there ought to be a "DC Class of XYZ" pool established at the start of every session, and new members of the House and Senate would have to exchange all of their investment holdings - all of them - for proportional shares in the pool established at their first election. Shares of the pool 100% invested in US-only equities. Eliminate the possibility as well as the appearance of inside information-misuse. If people didn't like that, nobody's forcing them to run for office.

But that's not how it works today. They keep their stuff, can add to it and sell it, just have to report transactions.

Anything is possible, but let's hear what they say before sending for feathers, and boiling the tar, maybe?

Pretty sure elected officials are specially prohibited from insider trading by the STOCK Act. Problem is that it isn't enforced and probably never will be. Too many powerful people stand to lose too much. It's one of those laws anyone should be able to support and then forget about enforcement.

Also, I'm not sure dumping stock to prevent losses qualifies as a "gain."

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
I would have thought that 'accusation=guilt' reaction might have been put to bed after the Kavanaugh nonsense. . . . . Public figures are constrained about what they can and should say in a crisis, to avoid promoting/creating panic.

Dozens of explanations possible. Scheduled transactions; part of a portolio rebalance; managed by others and not their decision, .... Wait to hear them? Nah, the media's in feeding frenzy mode. And I note that the thread title omits Dianne Feinstein (D) - what's with that? . . . They keep their stuff, can add to it and sell it, just have to report transactions.

Anything is possible, but let's hear what they say before sending for feathers, and boiling the tar, maybe?

I guess I have two concerns.

First, from various connections, I believe self serving dishonesty in politics is more common than we know, even the "norm" in many circles. Not that I support guilty until proven innocent; but if one did assume guilty until proven innocent in politics, they would be right too often. (As they say in the lawyer circles, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's probably a duck).

Second is the double standard. Many of those making the accusations are themselves guilty of the same dishonesty, or they only accuse those on the other side of the political fence while ignoring corruption on their own side of the fence.

I did read that Dianne Feinstein has a "blind trust", which, in theory says she has no knowledge or influence over her investment portfolio. Anyone who believes that, I have a bridge in Chappaquiddick I would like to sell them. DiFi is a queen of political cronyism - mega$$ of gov't spending goes to her friends.

All in all, I have little confidence or expectation that politicians will be honest once in office. And generally (not always) the longer in office, the less honesty they have.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee: . . . Problem is [the law] it isn't enforced and probably never will be. Too many powerful people stand to lose too much. . . .

I think that needs a repeat.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Reports are Feinstein from KA got in on that action as well.

The Prez nailed the reporter about this during today's presscon. "Why did you name two Republicans, but not the Democrat (Feinstein)?" She squirmed out of it.

Yes, members of Congress are covered for insider trading by the STOCK Act...

Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge

If you want Richard Burr to resign so that the demokrat governor can appoint a RHINO, go ahead but I'd rather a Republican than a demokrat appointee.

Also, it's election year, demoKrats are doing everything in their power to grab more power, they're an ammoral party and bringing Burr's alleged financial dealings is part of their strategy.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Reports are Feinstein from KA got in on that action as well.

The Prez nailed the reporter about this during today's presscon. "Why did you name two Republicans, but not the Democrat (Feinstein)?" She squirmed out of it.

Yes, members of Congress are covered for insider trading by the STOCK Act...

Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge

Well, he mentioned Feinstein a moment before but did not mention any Republicans, so it's the normal tit-for-tat stuff.

I'd wager politicians have no shortage of toilet paper...

quote:

Originally posted by az4783054:
I'd wager politicians have no shortage of toilet paper...

Seems like many use their copies of the Constitution

Here's that exchange between Trump and whoever she was...