On March 12, Bloomberg reported that the Department of Defense was canceling a $2.5 billion grant to chip-maker Intel. The money was supposed to make Intel "a dedicated supplier of chips for military and intelligence needs, designating a so-called Secure Enclave within the company’s factory." While it is possible that Intel may be able to recover some or all of the funds from the Commerce Department, according to Bloomberg, the announcement could "limit the total amount that Intel has been expecting to get in federal funding."
Not going to hold my breath waiting for members of Congress voting to limit their own ability to stay in office, limit their terms, benefit family members, increase their incomes, limit lobbying upon leaving office--you get the idea.
The STOCK Act was another bit of toothless political theater. As Judd notes, it banned members of Congress from trading stocks based on inside information. Sure. Who's going to police that? The House and Senate Ethics Committee's - don't make me laugh. How about the DoJ? Is Merrick Garland breathing or is it a Weekend at Bernie's thing over there? They passed the law. They made the splash. They knew they could just carry on as usual because no one would hold them accountable. And the fact that they don't return Judd's calls when he confronts them is all the proof we need.
It’s not just about character. When you live in a system, playing by the current rules makes sense. It’s logical. THAT’S why we have to CHANGE THE SYSTEM.
I admire Nancy Pelosi. AND I know that she understood the rules of the game and played them, sometimes to personal advantage.
Unfortunately, American politics has become mire and more about money over the years, and the Citizens United decision seemed to cap it. Until we get money out of American politics, we are doomed to repeat the all day, all year long financial appeals that have become a ubiquitous hallmark of life in the US.
Based on some history that I’ve read, politics and governance decisions are ALWAYS about power and money. Power to decide for others is significant. It takes money to run a country.
To quote my Dear old Daddy, "You don't have to believe in the hereafter, to know what some people are here after. When the likes of MTG goes to Congress and in four years is a millionaire, insider trading is just part of how it happens on $178k per year.
Turbeville is a comic book villian making money at the expense of others as a politician just as he made his sports fortune as a coach.
Why isn't this activity considered insider trading? If it walks, talks and acts like....The profits should be seized and held in a government account until the trader can convince the ethics committee that the sale or purchase had nothing to do with insider info. If not he forfeits the profit to the treasury and pays a 20% fine along with 6 weeks of sanctioning on first offense. proven second offense requires force retirement without pension. Simple stuff guys. (KISS) No need for 600 pages of loop hole ridden text. This could be an executive order that would propel Biden into his next term.
Why would they vote against their own self interests? They wont. And even if they do, they will simply establish fake blind trusts and skirt the rules anyways. I'm sure it was pure coincidence that these three senators sold intel stock ahead of this cancelled deal. It had absolutely nothing to do with the insider information they possessed. Who believes this nonsense?
Call your reps/senators and tell them to support Rep. Ro Khanna's No Pac Act, HR 9134. Tell them if they can't get behind commonsense legislation supported by 86% of the American public, you'll have to assume they're part of the problem.
- bans MOC from trading individual stocks
- bans candidates from taking PAC or lobbyist money
It is data warfare and those with the earliest access to new data profit the most. They also generate data, like ”news” of a potential merger sending stock prices soaring. The Street has always been this way, always a gamble unless you are working for the casino. We cannot allow elected officials to gamble while in office. Perhaps we could limit them to sports betting, though some hold influence there, too. Viewed this way, the impropriety is stunning.
Stunning indeed. But when you vote the new, supposedly clean boss in and he/she learns the ropes, what's stopping him/her from becoming the old boss? Is this all we can expect to get?
This practice has become essentially an elected official's entitlement program since stocks began trading. Aware of confidential information as a result of congressional hearings or simply industry confidants or stock brokers seeking political points, these officials know their only real risk is trading in such an egregious fashion that even so-called congressional ethics committees can't cast a blind eye.
It's disgusting that the electorate doesn't demand more from their officials. At the same time it's important that a reasonable degree of investigation ensues following allegations of impropriety. Such investigations must necessarily be internal to the particular institution. Otherwise, it would be too easy for an individual, company, or even a foreign government to smear an elected official with false claims. The challenge to such institutions is to conduct the investigation in a timely manner, and then publish their findings about why the allegations have been dismissed. This last part is typically absent form current processes.
A “blind trust” might be the best solution if all would have to participate. This is something that is difficult for individuals to ignore. Usually. But if a given member promises the “base” whatever outlandish current fear the base has been told they should have——-then that congressperson could do anything and get away with it. Anyway PLEASE keep banging away at the hypocrisy. There must be a voice that cares.
Would love to see a more timely report and something that is more accessible than PDF’s filed long after the transactions. Executives at public companies have 2 business days to disclose trades. Also interesting that when judges are given the same kind of scrutiny they have significant conflicts.
Judd makes crystal clear there oughta be a law against this shit - but there ain't til we make some progressive changes in this country.
It's depressing as hell to see Blumenthal behave no better than Tuberville.
Nothing will be done and nothing will change.
Do you seriously expect these people to regulate themselves?
If Congress isn't bad enough, look at the Supreme Court. It may not be insider stock trading, but it's just as bad.
And the 99% of the rest of us? Bend over and paste a smile on your face.
If you think either party is fighting for you, you've lost the plot. Same game, different audience.
Not going to hold my breath waiting for members of Congress voting to limit their own ability to stay in office, limit their terms, benefit family members, increase their incomes, limit lobbying upon leaving office--you get the idea.
Keep covering this issue!!
The STOCK Act was another bit of toothless political theater. As Judd notes, it banned members of Congress from trading stocks based on inside information. Sure. Who's going to police that? The House and Senate Ethics Committee's - don't make me laugh. How about the DoJ? Is Merrick Garland breathing or is it a Weekend at Bernie's thing over there? They passed the law. They made the splash. They knew they could just carry on as usual because no one would hold them accountable. And the fact that they don't return Judd's calls when he confronts them is all the proof we need.
It’s ethically wrong and they do it anyways, showing their true character.
It’s not just about character. When you live in a system, playing by the current rules makes sense. It’s logical. THAT’S why we have to CHANGE THE SYSTEM.
I admire Nancy Pelosi. AND I know that she understood the rules of the game and played them, sometimes to personal advantage.
Unfortunately, American politics has become mire and more about money over the years, and the Citizens United decision seemed to cap it. Until we get money out of American politics, we are doomed to repeat the all day, all year long financial appeals that have become a ubiquitous hallmark of life in the US.
Hey Jim. "Mire and more" works even BETTER than "more and more!" Hahaha. I love it!
mire
/ˈmī(ə)r/
noun
1.
a stretch of swampy or boggy ground.
"acres of land had been reduced to a mire"
2.
a situation or state of difficulty, distress, or embarrassment from which it is hard to extricate oneself.
"he has been left to squirm in a mire of new allegations"
Based on some history that I’ve read, politics and governance decisions are ALWAYS about power and money. Power to decide for others is significant. It takes money to run a country.
Anyone else would be smacked with insider trading in a heartbeat. What these guys get away with makes me sick.
To quote my Dear old Daddy, "You don't have to believe in the hereafter, to know what some people are here after. When the likes of MTG goes to Congress and in four years is a millionaire, insider trading is just part of how it happens on $178k per year.
Turbeville is a comic book villian making money at the expense of others as a politician just as he made his sports fortune as a coach.
Rules for thee, not for me.
And in other news, water is wet.
Two things older than dirt: Me and politician insider trading.
Yep. Like it's the world's second oldest profession and these mopes are always on the job!
Why isn't this activity considered insider trading? If it walks, talks and acts like....The profits should be seized and held in a government account until the trader can convince the ethics committee that the sale or purchase had nothing to do with insider info. If not he forfeits the profit to the treasury and pays a 20% fine along with 6 weeks of sanctioning on first offense. proven second offense requires force retirement without pension. Simple stuff guys. (KISS) No need for 600 pages of loop hole ridden text. This could be an executive order that would propel Biden into his next term.
Why would they vote against their own self interests? They wont. And even if they do, they will simply establish fake blind trusts and skirt the rules anyways. I'm sure it was pure coincidence that these three senators sold intel stock ahead of this cancelled deal. It had absolutely nothing to do with the insider information they possessed. Who believes this nonsense?
Call your reps/senators and tell them to support Rep. Ro Khanna's No Pac Act, HR 9134. Tell them if they can't get behind commonsense legislation supported by 86% of the American public, you'll have to assume they're part of the problem.
- bans MOC from trading individual stocks
- bans candidates from taking PAC or lobbyist money
- imposes term limits for MOC
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/9134/text?r=6&s=1
It is data warfare and those with the earliest access to new data profit the most. They also generate data, like ”news” of a potential merger sending stock prices soaring. The Street has always been this way, always a gamble unless you are working for the casino. We cannot allow elected officials to gamble while in office. Perhaps we could limit them to sports betting, though some hold influence there, too. Viewed this way, the impropriety is stunning.
"Viewed this way, the impropriety is stunning."
Stunning indeed. But when you vote the new, supposedly clean boss in and he/she learns the ropes, what's stopping him/her from becoming the old boss? Is this all we can expect to get?
This practice has become essentially an elected official's entitlement program since stocks began trading. Aware of confidential information as a result of congressional hearings or simply industry confidants or stock brokers seeking political points, these officials know their only real risk is trading in such an egregious fashion that even so-called congressional ethics committees can't cast a blind eye.
It's disgusting that the electorate doesn't demand more from their officials. At the same time it's important that a reasonable degree of investigation ensues following allegations of impropriety. Such investigations must necessarily be internal to the particular institution. Otherwise, it would be too easy for an individual, company, or even a foreign government to smear an elected official with false claims. The challenge to such institutions is to conduct the investigation in a timely manner, and then publish their findings about why the allegations have been dismissed. This last part is typically absent form current processes.
A “blind trust” might be the best solution if all would have to participate. This is something that is difficult for individuals to ignore. Usually. But if a given member promises the “base” whatever outlandish current fear the base has been told they should have——-then that congressperson could do anything and get away with it. Anyway PLEASE keep banging away at the hypocrisy. There must be a voice that cares.
Would love to see a more timely report and something that is more accessible than PDF’s filed long after the transactions. Executives at public companies have 2 business days to disclose trades. Also interesting that when judges are given the same kind of scrutiny they have significant conflicts.