ESOMKnicks wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:
Ignorance does not offend me. Falafel shop? That's what you come up with. Genius.

Can't you answer simple questions?
What actions trigger insider trading?

You just proved how much you know. Typical for guys that only regurgitate jargon heard on Fox or far right podcasts but have no thoughts of their own.

Ignorance is not a sin. Refusing to learn is. I may not know much, but looks like I know more than you, even though cannot claim having spent years on Wall Street. And, unlike you, I try to back up my claims with facts and explanations instead of just hurling unprovoked empty insults accusing people of stupidity.

A case in point, here is a claim made by you.

HofstraBBall wrote:Btw, firms don't investigate insider trading, the SEC does.

Yet in the below example, we see that firms actually do conduct insider trading investigations internally.

MICHAEL J. GARCIA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that JENNIFER WANG, 31, and her husband RUBIN CHEN, 34, of Englishtown, New Jersey, pleaded guilty in Manhattan federal court to insider trading charges. The trading took place based on material nonpublic information that WANG obtained from her former employer, Morgan Stanley, regarding acquisitions of three publicly traded companies.
.....
WANG and CHEN resigned earlier this year from their respective employers following a Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) inquiry and internal investigations by Morgan Stanley and ING .

https://www.lawfuel.com/blog/us-attorney-reports-former-morgan-stanley-financial-analyst-and-her-husband-plead-guilty-to-insider-trading/

For your reference, Morgan Stanley and ING are financial firms, i.e. the proverbial "Wall Street" in this case.

So, how did your traders like their falafels? Plain or extra spicy?

N.B. Your rant about Pelosi not violating this or that rule was also off the mark. If you were to read my prior post more carefully, you would have seen that I was well aware of the possibility that different rules may apply to members of Congress than to Wall Street employees. And I asked an honest question to clarify that point. You could have educated me, but instead you chose to hurl unprovoked empty insults.

Btw, The answer to my question as to what constitutes Insider Trading is mentioned above.
But you are right man. Insults do not educate. I apologize. Assuming you know that there is something on the books to address congress being able to invest.

Do not see what the investigation process has to do with your initial point and my questions of why you feel Pelosi participated in insider trading but maybe this explains what you do not understand from above.

Corporations HAVE to to an internal investigation to remove themselves from being part of the prosecution or implicated in any wrong doing following an "Inquiry" by the SEC. They also do internal periodic investigations to get in front of any wrong doing by their employees. Part of self governing protocol that is required by the SEC. The SEC only investigates brokers/firms if they believe their has been a violation of any of the guidelines established by act mentioned above.

Back to our main discussion point. Did Pelosi engage in insider trading.
In 2011 Pelosi was accused of insider trading (by same side of the aisle claiming covid trades were illegal) with no inquiry ever initiated by the SEC. Pelosi was then accused of insider trading during to the crash caused by Covid (from right side of the aisle). The claim suggested that trades made by Pelosi's husband was influenced by congressional insight to the emergence of Covid. This claim was prove to be wrong as Pelosi's trades were prior to congressional briefing on Covid in late January of 2020.

The question I wanted you to answer is in your quoted article above.
What triggers Insider Trading? There has to be illegal sharing of NON PUBLIC information. Therefore suggesting someone committed insider trading while having knowledge of a bill which was presented in congress seems dishonest. Considering the contents were public.

HofstraBBall wrote:
Btw, The answer to my question as to what constitutes Insider Trading is mentioned above.
But you are right man. Insults do not educate. I apologize. Assuming you know that there is something on the books to address congress being able to invest.

Do not see what the investigation process has to do with your initial point and my questions of why you feel Pelosi participated in insider trading but maybe this explains what you do not understand from above.

Corporations HAVE to to an internal investigation to remove themselves from being part of the prosecution or implicated in any wrong doing following an "Inquiry" by the SEC. They also do internal periodic investigations to get in front of any wrong doing by their employees. Part of self governing protocol that is required by the SEC. The SEC only investigates brokers/firms if they believe their has been a violation of any of the guidelines established by act mentioned above.

Back to our main discussion point. Did Pelosi engage in insider trading.
In 2011 Pelosi was accused of insider trading (by same side of the aisle claiming covid trades were illegal) with no inquiry ever initiated by the SEC. Pelosi was then accused of insider trading during to the crash caused by Covid (from right side of the aisle). The claim suggested that trades made by Pelosi's husband was influenced by congressional insight to the emergence of Covid. This claim was prove to be wrong as Pelosi's trades were prior to congressional briefing on Covid in late January of 2020.

The question I wanted you to answer is in your quoted article above.
What triggers Insider Trading? There has to be illegal sharing of NON PUBLIC information. Therefore suggesting someone committed insider trading while having knowledge of a bill which was presented in congress seems dishonest. Considering the contents were public.

Okay, and I apologize for my falafel thing, it was wrong and mean. I generally try to keep things cordial with my fellow Knicks fans, regardless of differences of opinion, and can also take some flame while turning the other cheek, but I have been getting a bit tired of unprovoked and unsubstantiated things directed at me lately.

Insider trading is what you say it is - trading on material non-public information. It is wrong from a legal perspective, it is also wrong from a moral perspective. There are various laws and regulations against insider trading. Private companies, including securities firms, also have policies and procedures in place to prevent insider trading violations. All this plethora of measures may work differently for private individuals, corporations and government officials. How members of Congress are treated or limited from the insider trading perspective, I do not know in detail.

But if a legislator is involved in non-public proceedings (i.e., drafting new laws and regulations) that could have a material influence on stock prices of certain companies, while his/her close family member trades in the securities of the same companies, it is wrong. It may or may not be illegal, but it is still wrong and improper from an ethical and moral perspective. And if it is not illegal, in my view it should be made illegal.

That is all I was trying to say originally.

BTW, I have never listeded to any right wing podcasts, in fact, I have never listened to a podcast ever in my life. I do not even know how it is done. And have no clue who Alex Jones is.

Trump can do 100 things wrong. What do his followers do? Pull up biased news to counter to justify. Two wrongs don't make a right. And when Trump went nuclear on voter fraud and non to be found in mass well then we "rinse-lather-repeat". Brick by brick tearing down the fabric that holds this country together.

We choose sides that serve our values. A black man will over look Trumps racist tendencies as his gig satisfies the anti welfare state of handouts, anti abortion, and perhaps intolerance of same sex marriage. Can be religious reasons or biological repulsion. Don't matter. The end justifies the means.

Liberal elitism has not addressed many issues it promotes. Im not ignorant that leaning left solves all. It does not. But priorities have to be met and collectively elections matter. Look at Brexit. Putins goal of weakening nato/European Union by interfering via misinformation to a lazy ignorant voting base manipulated the outcome. They have come to regret it.

Strong indépendant men who don't care about women, same sex issues, and have good wages are empowered by Trumpian politics as it validates their ascension above the volnerable.

Lets be real. This country has been divided from day one. Think about this, "Patriots" in the revolutionary war were in fact rebels. Align your beliefs to the cause and you think your right. The folks that stormed on January 6th believe they were in the right.

doomed wrote:Never trust a politician.

FIFY. Trust has to be earned. I think it prudent to constantly question and challenge our politicians regardless of party affiliation and their lifestyle and money prior to taking office. Are they motivated by power, greed or trying to do the right thing for the public good?