US Politics, March 2020 — There’s a very good chance you’re not going to die.

It's not the stock sale that makes this so terrible, it's doing it while willfully misleading the public about the immanent danger that puts it on a whole other level.

Can we all shut up about his Burr story until such time as he is in handcuffs and/or has resigned (neither of which will ever happen)? This is the dumbest story, goes on all the time in congress (with members of both parties I'm sure), and is a waste of fucking breath given the general climate of white collar legal enforcement.

This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever read on one of these politics threads.

He realized something horrible was going to happen. That people would die. That the market would crash. He told people behind closed doors. He sold his stock. But he kept on saying things were going great in public, because Trump was saying so. That is so horrifying.

This is a great example how 'they are all monsters!' mostly helps hide what is actually monstrous.

reposting an agraybee tweet well-actuallying jamelle freaking bouie. a new level of resistanceholing, even for alfred

xxxxxp Ahem, I had in fact forgotten about Chris Collins. Still skeptical anything is going to happen to the Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

It's not the stock sale that makes this so terrible, it's doing it while willfully misleading the public about the immanent danger that puts it on a whole other level.

― Mario Meatwagon (Moodles), Friday, March 20, 2020 11:17 AM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

^^^^^^^

I don't care about a Senator getting rich by unethical means because that's been a longstanding tradition in American politics, on both sides of the aisle I might add. But we are increasingly finding out that taking this seriously in January as opposed to now (when it's totally out of control) may have wound up potentially saving hundreds of thousands of lives & millions of jobs, and if the people in charge took the opportunity to make themselves rich instead then it should quite literally be treated as a crime against humanity

This is kinda besides the point, but I don't think it made them rich, right? They just avoided a loss, they didn't short the stock? It doesn't make it any less horrifying in my book, though

The right thing would be for them to donate any realized gains (which I am sure they have) from each of those sales. This is what most financial institutions make employees do when some violates a trade rule for their personal accounts. But also, they should never have been able to trade single name stocks in their accounts if they had the ability to direct trades.

petty bitch time. Trump just wants to mention DIane Feinstein.

going to to never stop loling when she’s the only one who gets shit for this

Her sale looks somewhat more innocuous

all while Loeffler’s notoriety will just to skyrocket her to 2024 GOP candidate short list

Her sale looks somewhat more innocuous

A blind trust, you won't even get confirmations about the transactions or statements. You have no clue what is in it.

I’m laughably ignorant when it comes to these matters. Is it a legal designation?

And I take it that the Trump Org declined to do so?

My experience with blind trusts, albeit indirect, is that the trustee is usually someone with whom the grantor has a longstanding personal/professional relationship. So if you get together with the trustee for other purposes it is not that hard to have an in-person conversation (if they are smart) and make any necessary decisions regarding the trust assets. ,Not to mention the possible use of intermediaries known to both parties. It might not be as seamless or provide as quick response to market changes, but I am highly skeptical that the grantor has no ability to transmit decisions that need to be made.

And my indirect experience is with a blind trust involving a politician.

The Burr story is incredibly abhorrent and not at all what goes on all the time.
― Frederik B, Friday, March 20, 2020 12:15 PM (one hour ago)

It's not the stock sale that makes this so terrible, it's doing it while willfully misleading the public about the immanent danger that puts it on a whole other level.
― Mario Meatwagon (Moodles), Friday, March 20, 2020 12:17 PM (one hour ago)

This also seems beyond the pale to me.

Like if the assets in the blind trust were owned by you immediately prior to taking office, and the invested assets were managed (both before and after the trust) by someone you have known for 30 years, and the trustee is someone both you and your investment manager have known for 30 years, do I have to connect the dots . . .

serious question: why isn't Joe Biden holding daily press conferences to establish himself as an executive option, correcting WH narrative, etc.?

Are they legit hiding him for fear of gaffes? This seems like the most softball move imaginable. It's sitting there on a plate.

Senators should be forced to move all their assets into Vanguard Target Retirement funds

xp Hadrian he's got a bad brain

lol xpost

Sad lol.

OK but can't they plug him in for 20 mins at a time? what the fuck is he doing right now? Trump was just on TV talking about how he inhereited an obsolete, broken pandemic response system, but now he's FIXED it

Maybe get out in front of this NOW so this guy can't get away w/ actually campaigning on this shitshow?

In a lot of investment banks they make rules, like those who work in Research cannot trade in single name stocks or can have fully managed accounts but no sector based funds or stocks in the sector you write about. And you are allowed to have blind trusts but there is a lot of documentation involved about setting it up and who gets confirmations and statements. And there is explicit instructions about what is able to be communicated. But if you are shady it doesn't matter.

Missed the briefing today. CNN is using words like "shameful" and "reprehensible," especially pertaining to one reporter he attacked.

But if you are shady it doesn't matter.

Yeah, my sense is that they only really stop people that wouldn't trade on inside info anyway.

and in this case, i didn't see exactly what they learned in that meeting, but I think you would have a hard time proving it was material non-public information when it generally was in the news every day. It's just ethically terrible that they downplayed it while preparing for the worst. And you would have to look for their trading patterns over the last several years to really make a case. But still I vote for ....guillotines.

PBKR’s scenario p much how I’ve always imagined it, but again, I’m way out of my depth here

i used to be a subject matter exPeRt about trade surveillance at two banks I worked at, but that has a lot more explicit policies and enforcement of rules and penalties. Conflict of interest doesn't exist in politics anymore.

THREAD: Did Senator Richard Burr engage in insider trading when he sold off $1.6 million in stock while he was receiving briefings about the coronavirus?

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) March 19, 2020

yes, so this ^^^ basically does a better job of explaining it.

and there should be financial advisor records of whether the trades were solicited or unsolicited and the type of account it was held in (to include all of his immediate family accounts). I doubt anyone was trading in an online broker but maybe...

Burr was uzin E*Trade

My favorite insider trading case was SEC v. Switzer, in which Barry Switzer, then football coach at the University of Oklahoma (later head coach of the Dallas Cowboys), claimed he overheard the inside information while attending a high school track meet, made trades on the information, was sued by the SEC, and was able to get the suit dismissed because the information was "inadvertently" disclosed (yeah right).

serious question: why isn't Joe Biden holding daily press conferences to establish himself as an executive option, correcting WH narrative, etc.?

maybe his advisors think that having him constantly acting in public as a nay-saying alternative POTUS, he'd be seen as undercutting the 'legitimate' POTUS in a time of crisis, a move that most voters would see as wrong-headed, because it accomplishes nothing positive, while weakening the guy who has the authority to actually do things.

yes, sounds like SOP for that crowd

the thing is, he CAN do something positive while criticizing the president, forcing his hand on more aggressive measures

Q: What do you say to Americans who are scared

TRUMP: "I say that you're a terrible reporter, that's what I say."

Unreal. pic.twitter.com/RJ1aJXJUUh

— Pod Save America (@PodSaveAmerica) March 20, 2020

what the fuuuuck

oh we're doing this on both threads now? Biden has no leverage or political power, he can't force anyone's hand at anything.

xps

the presunmptive Democratic nominee for president has no political power?

OK but can't they plug him in for 20 mins at a time? what the fuck is he doing right now? Trump was just on TV talking about how he inhereited an obsolete, broken pandemic response system, but now he's FIXED it

Maybe get out in front of this NOW so this guy can't get away w/ actually campaigning on this shitshow?

― Webcam Du Bois (Hadrian VIII), Saturday, March 21, 2020 4:35 AM (fifty-one minutes ago)

if you have not already concluded from his failure to do this that Biden is not capable of doing this (by interest or ability), I invite you to shave with one of Ockham's fine products

the presunmptive Democratic nominee for president has no political power?

crazy but true!

it's almost as if people have to win an election (or secure an appointment) before they have any power

that lash out at that reporter was fucking weird. Dude is cracking up.

In better circumstances, you would want the presumptive nominee on your "team" to be campaigning in order to win the election, not being hidden from the public in the hope that they don't realise he is incapable of thinking or discussing, let alone leadership, and somehow end up excited to vote for him.

I wish Biden would speak up. Obama spoke up lots about the financial situation in 2008. I understand the difference in that a) he was a sitting senator, and b) he was the nominee, not the presumptive nominee in a still contested nomination. He wasn't speaking up as a senator, though--he was speaking up as someone who might possibly inherit the present situation. I don't think for a second Biden would be laying back if he were younger and less like what's been on view the past few months.

Dude is cracking up.

He's never held any position of serious responsibility before in his life and now this happens.

also different because this is more than *just* money, it is potentially hundreds of thousands of people dying and we happen to be in a situation in which we have even less competent leadership than GWB