CoronaBro Meltdown/SARS-Covid-19 Spitballing Thread

[DaBigTrain]

you can answer the same question from me.

It’s an obvious conflict of interest. I would like to hear your reasoning first before I expand, since you made the claim.

[michigancat]

i mean, that really doesn't matter at all.

it probably doesn't but it doesn't feel right

[waks]

Can't find a link but Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin is being accused on Twitter as well. He voted against the relief bill and has this fantastic quote:

...getting coronavirus is not a death sentence except for maybe no more than 3.4 percent of our population (and) I think probably far less.

[Justwin]

you can answer the same question from me.

It’s an obvious conflict of interest. I would like to hear your reasoning first before I expand, since you made the claim.

How is it more of a conflict of interest now?  Does her husband being the chair make it so she is magically more able to sell stock?  It's been a conflict of interest ever since she became a Senator and her husband was Chair of the NYSE.

[sys]

do you think the nyse processed her trades a millisecond faster?  what's the fantasy corruption here?

[sys]

it probably doesn't but it doesn't feel right

it's another datum on the overlap in wealth and political power.  other than that, it's meaningless.

[chum1]

they probably didn't do anything illegal.

This was my first impulse, but the STOCK Act seems to be pretty clear. I still share some of the skepticism, though.

i definitely haven't delved into the details of the restrictions of insider trading or on what they knew at the time of their trades.  but, just based off of three of them taking the same action, i'm guessing they were within the letter of the law.

like, if the briefing being discussed consisted of publicly available info, i'm pretty confident it doesn't matter if the senators were publicly saying - "hey, country, don't panic about this unimportant publicly available info" and then panic selling everything they had in the market.

At the very least, it was a closed door meeting. So things discussed by senators in he meeting were not known to the public.

[Kat Kid]

I would be surprised they even get a censure because our country is definitely not an oligarchy

they probably didn't do anything illegal.

I know. That’s the problem.

And don’t listen to chum, he still thinks Robert Mueller is going to finally get Trump.

[DaBigTrain]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

If she and all senators do this volume of trading regularly it’s not a big deal. It doesn’t seem that way tho.

[Justwin]

they probably didn't do anything illegal.

This was my first impulse, but the STOCK Act seems to be pretty clear. I still share some of the skepticism, though.

i definitely haven't delved into the details of the restrictions of insider trading or on what they knew at the time of their trades.  but, just based off of three of them taking the same action, i'm guessing they were within the letter of the law.

like, if the briefing being discussed consisted of publicly available info, i'm pretty confident it doesn't matter if the senators were publicly saying - "hey, country, don't panic about this unimportant publicly available info" and then panic selling everything they had in the market.

At the very least, it was a closed door meeting. So things discussed by senators in he meeting were not known to the public.

I may be way off base here, but my understanding of insider trading is that it has more to do with specific information about a firm rather than predicting how general events will affect a firm even if knowledge about general events is not widespread.  Is there something about insider trading where knowledge about something generally is not permissible upon which to trade?

[Justwin]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

If she and all senators do this volume of trading regularly it’s not a big deal. It doesn’t seem that way tho.

How is this trading more of a problem for Loeffler versus a problem for Burr and Inhofe?

[DaBigTrain]

they probably didn't do anything illegal.

This was my first impulse, but the STOCK Act seems to be pretty clear. I still share some of the skepticism, though.

i definitely haven't delved into the details of the restrictions of insider trading or on what they knew at the time of their trades.  but, just based off of three of them taking the same action, i'm guessing they were within the letter of the law.

like, if the briefing being discussed consisted of publicly available info, i'm pretty confident it doesn't matter if the senators were publicly saying - "hey, country, don't panic about this unimportant publicly available info" and then panic selling everything they had in the market.

At the very least, it was a closed door meeting. So things discussed by senators in he meeting were not known to the public.

I may be way off base here, but my understanding of insider trading is that it has more to do with specific information about a firm rather than predicting how general events will affect a firm even if knowledge about general events is not widespread.  Is there something about insider trading where knowledge about something generally is not permissible upon which to trade?

She bought stock in Citrix specifically, that alone is a red flag.

[chum1]

he still thinks Robert Mueller is going to finally get Trump.

Sorry you didn't find the subject as personally interesting as torture. Did anyone finally get anyone else over that?

[DaBigTrain]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

If she and all senators do this volume of trading regularly it’s not a big deal. It doesn’t seem that way tho.

How is this trading more of a problem for Loeffler versus a problem for Burr and Inhofe?

They were both in the same meeting. It’s literally the definition of insider trading for what they sold and bought.

[sys]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

[DaBigTrain]

https://twitter.com/bcappelbaum/status/1240818896531324931

[Justwin]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

If she and all senators do this volume of trading regularly it’s not a big deal. It doesn’t seem that way tho.

How is this trading more of a problem for Loeffler versus a problem for Burr and Inhofe?

They were both in the same meeting. It’s literally the definition of insider trading for what they sold and bought.

I can see the Citrix buying being something a zealous prosecutor would go after to try and score some political points and move up the ranks.  It definitely has the air of being more nefarious.

Regardless, how does Loeffler's husband being the Chair of the NYSE affect things?  Are Burr and Inhofe's wives the Chair of the NYSE as well?

[DaBigTrain]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

It’s the same issue, it’s a conflict of interest. The reason it’s a conflict is because of the stocks that she bought and sold. If she sold or bought a stock that has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s not an issue.

[Justwin]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

It’s the same issue, it’s a conflict of interest. The reason it’s a conflict is because of the stocks that she bought and sold. If she sold or bought a stock that has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s not an issue.

So to get back to where we started, what does her husband being the Chair of the NYSE have to do with anything?

[chum1]

he still thinks Robert Mueller is going to finally get Trump.

Sorry you didn't find the subject as personally interesting as torture. Did anyone finally get anyone else over that?

I want to be more diplomatic.

I know there are lots of people on twitter who think lots of crazy things. I just like that intelligence stuff. I read books about it!

[waks]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

It’s the same issue, it’s a conflict of interest. The reason it’s a conflict is because of the stocks that she bought and sold. If she sold or bought a stock that has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s not an issue.

So to get back to where we started, what does her husband being the Chair of the NYSE have to do with anything?

I think more than anything it's just bad optics.

[DaBigTrain]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

It’s the same issue, it’s a conflict of interest. The reason it’s a conflict is because of the stocks that she bought and sold. If she sold or bought a stock that has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s not an issue.

So to get back to where we started, what does her husband being the Chair of the NYSE have to do with anything?

I’ve already told you, dumbass.

[Justwin]

sys, it would be advisable to keep your and your sock posts separated a little more. However, it’s a conflict of interest because it wasn’t an isolated incident. Yes, as soon as both were in their current positions it’s suspect but nothing more. When it’s a combination of information, which may include other selling patterns, that’s when it become an issue. The likelihood of this all-senator meeting and the selling is quite unique and interesting.

it's probably been 10 years since i last posted with my one and only sock account.


loeffler using her position as a senator to (possibly illegally) dump stocks before a market crash is a different issue from her using her relationship to with the chair of the nyse to do ???.

It’s the same issue, it’s a conflict of interest. The reason it’s a conflict is because of the stocks that she bought and sold. If she sold or bought a stock that has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s not an issue.

So to get back to where we started, what does her husband being the Chair of the NYSE have to do with anything?

I’ve already told you, dumbass.

The facts that a Senator's husband is the Chair of the NYSE and she bought a NASDAQ-listed stock are somehow linked?

[sys]

you actually haven't, the big train.

[sys]

this actually really surprises me.  i guess the travel ban/chinavirus stuff is more effective than most of us here credit it with being?

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1240828936264847363