4 ms·
I don't think the parent mentioned military secrets in particular? But the insider trading is already well documented e.g. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c
by remus 6mo ago
I don't think the parent mentioned military secrets in particular? But the insider trading is already well documented e.g. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cge0grppe3po https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cge0grppe3po
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago> the insider trading The suspect hasn't been charged with insider trading. (OP said those "in DC seem to be able to do everything listed.")
- AlecSchueler 6mo ago> The suspect hasn't been charged with insider trading. I think that was the point GP was making.
- varjag 6mo agoPretty sure Count 1 through 5 above cover insider trading by administration officials too.
- bandrami 6mo agoThe problem is "insider trading" has a definition and acting based on knowledge of government secrets isn't what it is.
- jonathanstrange 6mo agoIANAL but what you state seems to literally fall under the STOCK Act of 2012. It is one kind of insider trading.
- varjag 6mo agoAnd what I am saying is that the same articles of prosecution as in the soldier's case are applicable for their case too. Not going after them is a choice.
- enoint 6mo agoI think 3 and 4 are frauds on others in the prediction market agreement. As in, it’s fraud against the terms of the market.