7 ms·
The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency
- oatmeal1 6mo ago"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
- joquarky 6mo agoWho defines what "good" is?
- throwaway27448 6mo agoI don't think good men have been allowed near government for many decades
- helterskelter 6mo agoIt's very nearly a contradiction of terms.
- N_Lens 6mo ago"Suspicions" doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
- Terr_ 6mo agoIn the sense of extreme understatement, yes, which is amusing since the "heavy lifting" is the other way around. Much like "There are looming suspicions over the effectiveness of colored quartz and homeopathic water." [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0
- Terr_ 6mo agos/is the other way/is usually the other way/
- none2585 6mo agoWhy bother reporting this - it's obviously happening and it's obvious that nothing is going to happen about it.
- fnordpiglet 6mo agoWell, given it’s a federal crime, pardons will happen.
- none2585 6mo agolol touché
- jfengel 6mo agoIs it a crime?
- fnordpiglet 6mo agoUnless you’re in Congress? Yes.
- rubyfan 6mo agoNothing will happen until the mid terms or 2028. This administration highlights why the pardon provisions of the constitution need amendment.
- e2le 6mo agoDespite the apathy of Americans, I continue to have hope that there will be consequences for all recent and past actions. It's unfortunate that recent events are only the tip of the iceberg, too many to even remember.
- zx8080 6mo agoWhat were the consequences after 2008 financial crisis?
- chollida1 6mo agoWhat were the crimes you believe were committed in 2008 and who do you think committed those crimes?
- uncivilized 6mo agoYou seem to think you’ve found some sort of gotcha. There were plenty of crimes committed in the MBS world. See GS, Credit Suisse, and others. However very few were prosecuted at the individual level.
- chollida1 6mo agoI wasn't looking for a gotcha at all. I was wondering what specific individuals are you referring to and what crimes you think they committed.
- SpicyLemonZest 6mo agoIt's a fair question that I used to ask, but it's a very answerable one. To pick one example (https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-59.htm https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-59.htm), the SEC believes that one Fabrice Tourre was primarily responsible for the mortgage fraud committed at Goldman Sachs. But either they never referred him to the DOJ for prosecution or the DOJ declined to prosecute him.
- 6mo ago
- amazingamazing 6mo agoGiven the scope of all government officials it should just be the case that you cannot trade individual equities, stocks or have any outside investments wholesale. Otherwise how could you stop it? It’s not like when you work at big co and you just stop trading their stock. You get access to information that clearly will be material potentially months in advance.
- SilverElfin 6mo agoThe problem is Trump’s family and friends and donors and people who have otherwise bribed him all can benefit from actions the administration takes. It’s not as simple as restricting the current officials.
- renewiltord 6mo agoWhy does making this rule matter? The pardon makes it all irrelevant.
- amazingamazing 6mo agoMy hot take is that the presidential pardon will be eliminated in our lifetime.
- ocdtrekkie 6mo agoI suspect in the aftermath of this administration, the power of the President as a whole is going to be massively stripped back.
- arjie 6mo agoI think it'll be interesting to see what the consequences are. In India, it used to be (I haven't lived there in decades) pretty par for the course for a new party to come into power and jail all the previous party's heads for corruption and then when it yoyos over the inverse would happen. That would be a worse outcome for the US, I think. It would stall any significant action from the government.
- waynecochran 6mo ago[flagged]
- mostlysimilar 6mo agoWhat does that have to do with the Trump admin?
- waynecochran 6mo agoPolitical insider trading example par excellence.
- defrost 6mo agoPelosi got a free Presidential jet and scooped the inside trades on Iran? Trump set a stratosphereic high bar for examples par excellence, I doubt all of Pelosi's husband trades add up to a signifigant fraction of Trump's crypto gains alone.
- waynecochran 6mo agoYou can actually buy an iOS app that mimicks Nancy Pelosi stock picks! Top that!
- ipython 6mo agoSure. This one’s free. https://www.trumpcorruptiontracker.com/ https://www.trumpcorruptiontracker.com/
- waynecochran 6mo agoThat does not allow you to buy stock based on what Trump picks.
- ipython 6mo ago
- matheusmoreira 6mo agoThere were bets on BRL/USD exchange rates just prior to Trump's tariffs announcement too. No doubt some people made a lot of money.
- ipython 6mo agoAdd onto all that Trump suing the IRS for $10 billion.
- idle_zealot 6mo ago> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading, and the writer clearly knows and agrees that it's obvious, but goes out of their way to throw in concessions and a build a veil of neutrality. You are legally allowed to accuse public officials of crimes. You do not have to gesture at "looming suspicions." A neutral reporting of the facts would make such an accusation, and tie it into the broader pattern of criminality. But it's more important to perform neutrality than to be honest, so we get this garbage. "Mr President, would you please comment on the allegations that-" "Shut up, piggie."
- davidw 6mo agoOnce you start seeing all the "both sides" and "sanewashing" you can't unsee it. And they lean on both so hard.
- red-iron-pine 6mo agowho is "they"?
- davidw 6mo agoCorporate media.
- dlenski 6mo agoThank you. I was going to simply comment "Suspicions"!?! … but you've explained it more thoroughly.
- awakeasleep 6mo agoIt may be different in the UK. They have defamation laws that seem insane to a USA person. (Burden of proof on the speaker to prove what they said is true iirc)
- dwd 6mo agoWhile insider trading is always a possibility, what often happen is trades are made in anticipation of an announcement without knowing what the announcement actually is, and Trump really is fairly predictable. You know hes going to TACO, question is when. I would be more interested to know if the traders had insider knowledge of timing of the announcement or if it was leaked.
- cosmicgadget 6mo ago> It found a consistent pattern of spikes just hours, or sometimes minutes, before a social media post or media interview was made public.
- SilentM68 6mo agoI don't see any actual evidence given in the story by the author. The BBC is not exactly known for unbiased reporting. It's been accused of systemic anti-Trump bias, including the misleading 2024 Panorama edit of his Jan 6 speech for which the network was forced to apologize. Again, proof or evidence? No direct names mentioned of insiders, or any leaks traced. I do not see it. The BBC cites trade volume spikes that were timed to the announcements and analyst opinions. But is that not how Forex and Future exchanges/trades work? Are they not driven by geopolitics? If anyone is calling for a SEC probe, then the investigation should start with the entire congressional body. If it were me, I would start by enacting term limit legislation for senate and house. I'd then start speaking to any politicians that have been expelled out or sacrificed by their own political parties. I'm sure they'll have a rather good story to tell. It will be interesting to see how many of these people will be open to public hearings on the matter.
- jmyeet 6mo agoHere are the lessons: 1. The Supreme Court is not some neutral arbiter of a hallowed intractable document. They are political actors. Just like history books now write about the disastrous Court of the 1850s that went completely off the rails (Reconstruction wasn't much better), history will likewise write about the Roberts court as (IMHO) the worst in American history, particularly Citizens United and Trump v. United States. The latter is most directly responsible for all of this. There is now absolutely no prospect of consequences for any of this. The president himself is immune and is now free to openly sell pardons for anyone gets indicted. And let's be real, nobody is getting indicted. This is brazen, unfettered kleptocracy; and 2. The Democratic Party itself, the donor class and the consultant class is completely on board with everything that's happening.f The term here is controlled opposition. Now you just feckless pronouncements like "Trump bad" but, for example, no objection to policy. Instead the objection is to process. For example, Hakeem Jeffries saying Congress should've authorized the Iran War. That's not an objection to the war. The Democratic establishment likes the war. All of these political careers are just stepping stones to their eventual private industry paydays. It's their children getting fake jobs at thinktanks, management consultancies, lobbying firms and so on. My personal opinion is that nothing will be solved. It's too late to do anything about this with electoral politics. Democratic politicians and the mainstream media has spent more effort attacking Hasan Piker in the last month than attacking Trump's foreseeably disastrous war or outright corruption with insider trading and pardons. This feels like a "So long and thanks for all the fish" moment. Princeton did a study on the effect of public opinion on what Congress does, specifically the impact of popularity of a bill passing and it actually passing [1]. It should surprise no one that public opinion has almost zero impact. [1]: https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba
- gcanyon 6mo ago> For example, Hakeem Jeffries saying Congress should've authorized the Iran War. Did he say, "Congress should have authorized the Iran War," or did he say "Congress should have to authorize the Iran War." Those are two very different statements. More to the point, did he say he would personally vote to authorize the Iran War? Did he say Democrats should vote to authorize the Iran War?
- wyldfire 6mo agoThe cult of personality is impenetrable. He won't be held to account, ever. Nor his sycophants in the administration.
- yanhangyhy 6mo agoCan anyone tell me why a great democratic system is unable to prevent this kind of problem? Even when it happens, there seem to be no effective measures to deal with it.
- cosmicgadget 6mo agoThe pardon power is absolute, so his accomplices have an out. The president has broad immunity that likely applies here or at least would be years of litigation. The only way to stop this is impeachment and 2/3rds of the Senate voting to convict. It is hard to imagine anything that would get the GOP to convict their president.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- mktk1001 6mo agoWhen all three branches of government fall under the grip of corrupt officials and their elected enablers, the checks and balances meant to safeguard the republic become little more than decorative machinery.
- GJim 6mo ago[dead]
- lawn 6mo agoIt's not a "great" system. The American system is flawed and has been continuously eroded and dismantled.
- tsoukase 6mo agoThe US people have difficulty to understand how easy is for a politician to take advantage of his position. This government sends a specific signal of corruption (glorious words, deactivation of control agencies, insider trading and who knows what else dye to pre-election commitments)
- red-iron-pine 6mo ago"suspicions"
- marysminefnuf 6mo agoWhen authors are neutral like this its self censorship to the point where it gives readers literal misinformation. Its obvious that the admin is driving mad with insider trading not just mere suspicions lol.
- insane_dreamer 6mo agoThe Trump admin is so openly self-dealing -- so many incidents that they don't even try to hide, or not much -- that the chances that the suspicious trades are coincidental or not the result of insider trading, are pretty much zero.
- digimantis 6mo agoAmerican legal system is turning into a joke. no one gets arrested
- burnerRhodov2 6mo agoIt's wild to me that this is blamed specifically on Trump. All members of congress, Democrat or Republican, have insider information. Why is this a hit piece aimed at Trump and not Congress?