Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 170 posts

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#111

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

testfoobar wrote: post #93
idle_zealot wrote: post #62

> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading,…

Allegations of insider trading are not the same as convictions of insider trading. No publication should be in the business of allocating criminal responsibility in advance of legal proceedings. If a crime is suspected then it should be reported to the authorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

I don't understand this response. Certainly they shouldn't say "Mr. John Smith is guilty" if a court hasn't found that. But there's nobody in particular being named here, just clear evidence that someone must have done it. If the police find a dead body, should newspapers pretend the victim might be alive somehow to avoid allocating criminal responsibility for murder?

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#112

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

nailer wrote: post #68
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we allowed a sense of decorum and a hope we could just "move on" to avoid that happening in 2021, and now we are suffering the wrath of not doing it. I suspect we will not make the same mistake in 2029.

[flagged]

What is the purpose of posting like this? Do you think we're going to forget he was being punished for launching a coup in 2021 if you don't mention it?

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#113

Post by defrost »

renewiltord wrote: post #109
waynecochran wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happiest country.. there is an objective measure

And you won’t believe it but the US didn’t make J D Power Best Places To Work either. In fact, I’m told that the Barclays Certified Happy Places To Live Brought To You By Standard Chartered doesn’t list a single American city.

To the country's credit, it is rocketing up the 2026 banana republic charts.

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#114

Post by librasteve »

idle_zealot wrote: post #62

> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading,…

yeah, and Trump will no doubt retort that this is BBC fake news in the light of their legal battle over (improperly) editing his speech

the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view and this often result in unbearable smugness and vaulting to “we are the ultimate arbiters of truth”

this is a big pity, because the alternative is Fox News / GB News

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#115

Post by zeristor »

testfoobar wrote: post #93
idle_zealot wrote: post #62

> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading,…

Allegations of insider trading are not the same as convictions of insider trading. No publication should be in the business of allocating criminal responsibility in advance of legal proceedings. If a crime is suspected then it should be reported to the authorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

Justice or Just ICE?

The rule of law hasn’t been an impediment for some, when the legal machinery has been co-opted

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#116

Post by sometimes_all »

librasteve wrote: post #114
idle_zealot wrote: post #62

> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading,…

yeah, and Trump will no doubt retort that this is BBC fake news in the light of their legal battle over (improperly) editing his speech the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view and this often result in unbearable smugness and vaulting to “we are the ultimate arbiters of truth” this is a big pity, because the alternative is Fox News / GB News

> the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view

I find this hilarious; the BBC has rarely provided a balanced view on many things. Indians (at almost every point in the political and social spectrum) will easily notice the bias and smug holier-than-thou attitude on India-specific news/opinion.

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#117

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

jmyeet wrote: post #80

Here are the lessons: 1. The Supreme Court is not some neutral arbiter of a hallowed intractable document. They are political actors. Just like history books now write about the disastrous Court of the 1850s that went completely off the rails (Reconstruction wasn't much better), history will likewise write about the Roberts court as (IMHO) the worst in American history, particularly Citizens United and Trump v. Unite…

> My personal opinion is that nothing will be solved. It's too late to do anything about this with electoral politics. Democratic politicians and the mainstream media has spent more effort attacking Hasan Piker in the last month than attacking Trump's foreseeably disastrous war or outright corruption with insider trading and pardons.

What? This is obviously untrue. You can add up every piece of Hasan Piker content CNN has ever run and it won't add up to a single day of Iran war coverage. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have not, as far as I can tell, ever so much as mentioned the guy.

We all get over our skis sometimes, but if this claim sounded even a tiny bit plausible to you, I beg you to reevaluate your media consumption diet. Someone's working hard to convince you that things are worse than they are and that Democrats stand for things they don't.

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#118

Post by renewiltord »

defrost wrote: post #113
renewiltord wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you won’t believe it but the US didn’t make J D Power Best Places To Work either. In fact, I’m told that the Barclays Certified Happy Places To Live Brought To You By Standard Chartered doesn’t list a single American city.

To the country's credit, it is rocketing up the 2026 banana republic charts.

JD Power ranking American fashion brands now? Not bad.

Re: The insider trading suspicions looming over Trump's presidency

#120

Post by cosmicgadget »

testfoobar wrote: post #93
idle_zealot wrote: post #62

> Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading, whereby bets are made by people based on information that is not available to the general public. > Others say the picture is more complicated and that some traders have become more adept at anticipating the president's interventions. This and the title are journalistic malpractice. This is an article designed to report on obvious insider trading,…

Allegations of insider trading are not the same as convictions of insider trading. No publication should be in the business of allocating criminal responsibility in advance of legal proceedings. If a crime is suspected then it should be reported to the authorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

What if they just said "insider trading (the act)" and not "insider trading (the crime)"?
Post reply on HN