Loyalty? From a Politician?

Blog Post
Do you expect loyalty from somebody who can’t even give you honesty?

And I’m not talking about the partner who did you wrong, took your money, your truck and your dog and headed south (cue a country song).

On January 24, members of the US Senate received a classified briefing about the ECONOMIC threat posed by the Chinese Plague/COVID-19. According to public records, the following US Senators dumped stocks, taking a profit:
Senator Richard Burr (R-NC)
Senator Kelly Loefner (R-GA)
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI)
Senator Jim Hofe (R-OK)
You don’t have to look it up. It’s all over the news and the Donkeys and their media surrogates are trying to use it to eliminate their competition. But party politics aside (if that’s even possible), what should be done about it? Or are they special? Or maybe I’m best asking, “how special are they?”
Trading on inside information is a crime. 
Should they:
* Be left alone. They were only looking after their own interests.
* Forfeit the profit that they made, with the money going to the US Treasury?
* Forfeit x2 the profit that they made (a fine in other words)?
* Be impeached and removed from office?
* Go to the same federal prison that Martha Stewart went to for doing the same thing?
* Be executed? (I know that some of this blog’s readers will favor that option)

36 thoughts on “Loyalty? From a Politician?

  1. Yes, they should be held accountable for insider trading. Will they? No. And don't expect Al Sharpton indicted for tax evastion, although the evidence against him is obvious. Or any other high profile offender, as those days of holding our betters to account has come and gone. Or more to the truth, that day was never here in the first place.

    Whatever happened to Jeffrey Epstein's murderers and conspirators into his death? Nothing.

  2. The Martha Stewart option seems appropriate, then as convicted felons they would forfeit their right to hold office. Oh yeah, that sweet pension those Congresscritters get? Say bye-bye, it ain't happening.

  3. Warm up Martha's old cell, every one of these grifter's need to have a little prison time to gain some perspective.

    Not holding my breath it'll happen.

  4. It's a sweet hustle. Maybe the single easiest way to become a millionaire on a $130K/yr salary. In Feinstein's case, billionaire.

  5. Number 6 on the list is my first choice ( or was the parenthetical part with me in mind? ), but I could be persuaded to go along with 3 and 4, if both were applied together.

    Thanks for the post.
    Paul L. Quandt

  6. I'm all for burning everybody in Congress and their sycophants alive… but.

    I don't think this qualifies as insider trading. The factors they used to drive their trades were all intuitively obvious to everyone on this blog, and everyone with any sense everywhere, weeks ago.

    It's not some big secret.

    Insider trading is when the CEO of Giant Insurance Thieves International calls his brother-in-law and tells him "we're ten billion in the hole, and we're padlocking the doors Friday, sell now".

    Doing trades on the basis that the world is going all in on quarantine hysteria, and everyone can see that, and that's obviously going to tank the economy for a while is not trading on privileged info.

    So, to reiterate in condensed form:

    Kill them all, but not for this.

  7. "Be executed? (I know that some of this blog's readers will favor that option)" We would applaud it and score it like an Olympic event…

  8. "Same as it ever was" is the best summary.

    I recall back a few years, must have been during the Obamanation, when there was fuss about congresscritter insider trading, so they passed a law saying it was illegal for them, too. A few months later, when people stopped looking, they repealed that law.

    Back to doing the routine things that would get us jail time, but not them.

  9. The Martha Stewart option seems appropriate. However, given that the Chinese had locked down Wuhan and several million people by then, the 'I read it in the newspaper' defense will probably prevail.

  10. Nor will that day ever come. If Hillary Clinton has never spent a day in jail, then nobody will.

  11. Martha Stewart didn't get locked up for insider trading, the feds caught her in a lie. That is a crime in the land of the free.
    She should have listened to the youtube lawyer advice, "never talk to the police".

  12. #6 sure is tempting, but I believe a combination of #3&#4 would be sufficient as long as it includes a loss of any pension as well.

  13. The disturbing part of all this is not what was in open source material. I myself made trades based on what I read. The disturbing portion and perhaps the criminal acts (we can argue the intent) was that they made trades IMMEDIATELY after receiving a CLASSIFIED briefing that (may have) included material NOT available to the public. Thus the problem.

    I'm sure that they will skate, but others have been destroyed personally for much less.

  14. The general conduct of Congress exists at such a low standard with routine leaks of top secret material are such that they'll survive to scam another day but 3 &4 would be appropriate.

  15. Shifting topics only slightly, I think that Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive Branch should be subject to the same healthcare system as the rest of the nation. That's not how it works, but it should. The same standards in all cases should apply to Congress, but they routinely exempt themselves.

  16. I go back to the CLASSIFIED nature of their briefing and the immediate sell off as soon as they left the room. I don't know that it will ever come to them having to mount a "defense". That would only happen if President Trump had done it.

  17. There was a dispute about what Martha Stewart told the FBI.

    This is how it works for everyone. FBI special agents show up and interview you. The interview is NEVER recorded. The FBI then (dutifully) writes down what they think that you said on a form 302.

    Did she lie? Maybe. You'd have to trust those FBI agents.

    We know that she went to prison.

  18. If they've been in Congress for any period of time they will have a "war chest" consisting of funds received but not applied to the next election. In almost all cases, that will far exceed what they'd get by way of pension. And they can keep it when they leave office. Sure, it's in the form of a "trust" or a "foundation" but it's theirs. Lapping at the trough works well for our elected representatives since they make the rules that they operate under.

  19. He got rich being USGOV's sole source to buy and sell property for the post office. He's not bright, just married an old liberal hag with stroke.

  20. I think it qualifies as insider trading, but not beyond the reasonable shadow. Unless the persecutor can prove just what it is they leaned that was not released to the general public, and prove that they wouldn't have dumped the stock otherwise – then they walk.

  21. I'm old school, I prefer crucifixion at least then they can suffer for a while. Most other methods are too quick thus merciful.
    Sorry, but I'm all out of mercy.


  22. The reasonable doubt argument for some of them is bolstered because their stock portfolio was managed by a blind trust. Richard Burr, on the other hand, would have a problem because of his conduct surrounding the briefing that day.

  23. The smug politicians feel that they can do anything and just walk free. It's the entire class of entitled elites, not just one or two.

  24. Lets all do a, "Chinese Fire drill" over it guys. Oh i'm not sorry these are the same despicable people on eBay and amazon that can't Spare a square… F it move on. This happens everyday.

  25. The media will scream bloody murder for the 4 GOP congresscritters to be scalped and probably won't even mention FineSwine. ALL of them should be charged with insider trading but if FineSwine isn't then NONE of them should be. And Martha Stewart did not do time for "insider trading". She was coerced into accepting a plea deal for obstruction of justice, conspiracy and lying to a Fed agent. In exchange she got 5 months. If she hadn't they would have convicted her for lying and she'd have gotten YEARS instead of months. She was essentially blackmailed into pleading out so the Just Us Department could crow about it and hang her scalp on their wall. Her only REAL mistake was in talking to a Federal Agent without her lawyer present. The FBI has a tactic where they send out two agents…ALWAYS two or more and start asking questions. ONE of them writes down notes on the conversation but they don't and WON'T ALLOW the conversation to be recorded. Then they go back to the office and Mr. Note Taker writes a "transcript" of what was said…..it's not a word for word but a summation taken from the NOTES, so there's a LOT of room for "invention" to occur. Then they wait. However many months later they think is adequate they show up again…..and ask questions. THEY have the "transcript" from the original conversation. Their victim of course doesn't even know such a document exists. If ANYTHING their victim says does NOT match exactly what that "transcript" says they arrest and charge them with the bogus but VERY useful "crime" of Lying To A Federal Agent. It becomes the word of their intended victim against two or more agents. Not exactly a case most citizens can beat since they didn't know they were being set up for a fall. Once they get you on this they can pressure you into just about anything under the threat of YEARS in prison for the bogus "lying" charge. Solution…..NEVER EVER talk to a federal agent ANYWHERE but in your lawyers office with a RECORDING DEVICE that the lawyer owns and controls present. I guarantee that 99.9% of the time when the intended victim agrees to talk to them but ONLY under those conditions they will decline, leave and NOT want to ask questions.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top