Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ruste 2283 days ago
Okay, really though, what information did they have access to that wasn't publicly available already? It's one thing to trade on the knowledge of a bill or piece of legislation that you're voting on, especially if you're a deciding vote, but unless I'm misunderstanding that didn't happen here. It doesn't seem like they had any information that wasn't public knowledge at that point. The whole economy was just slow to react to this. I've been paying attention to coronavirus news and honestly would have sold around the time they did had I had any exposure at the time. I get that it's easy to be mad about and makes a good headline, but I just don't see it. Maybe I'm just out of the loop though.
2 comments
munk-a 2283 days ago
These folks were still actively spinning "Oh don't you worry, golly gee wilikers this will all just blow over and, besides, on April 1st it'll stop being a thing." - while dumping their portfolio. They clearly acted immorally, they also pretty clearly broke a number of laws around senate behavior (insider trading is a thing for senators), and I think one of the best outcomes at the end of this might be forcing all elected officials to commit their assets to blind trusts.
link
throwaway_Bees 2283 days ago
>what information did they have access to that wasn't publicly available already?

Both classified and top secret information.

For example, changes to China's production, mobilization, expenditure (sale of stocks, debts, etc...), changes to net imports/decreases in net exports, satellite imagery, State Dept/CIA field officers analysis/reports, etc...

link
ruste 2282 days ago
Fair point if true, but without a source it sounds like speculation

I'd still say that by the end of january, there was absolutely plenty of reason to sell off stock. A reasonable person absolutely would have made that decision based on information that was already public.

link
throwaway_Bees 2282 days ago
>A reasonable person absolutely would have made that decision based on information that was already public.

The stock was sold immediately after a coronavirus briefing, not just some stock, his entire net worth.

Maybe it is reasonable to have sold your entire net worth based solely on the available public news, but then why not well before or well after the briefing and instead right after the briefing? Why tip of your wealth constituents at a $10,000/plate fundraiser while simultaneously maintaining a different political position publicly?

link