Fox, henhouse, etc.

He's just boostrapping himself to success, using all the skills and information at his disposal to feed his family. Why you wanna keep a white male down?

The case is the first of its kind involving a member of Congress.

Lol, that ought to tell you something right there.

2 senators voted against getting rid of insider trading. R-etards obviously. Other members of the GOP were warning Republicans not to amend the bill, because other Pubs were set and ready to foil it with bullshiat amendments. Crooked old fuhks.

FTFA:

Most of his investments are for less than $10,000, and almost all involve options rather than stock purchases. The options allowed Bachus to buy or sell stocks at certain prices in the future - betting that the value of those stocks will rise or fall.

To me, this is WORSE than just buying the stocks. He's betting which stocks will rise and fall, and is in an "oversight" position that allows influence of that very thing.

At what point did our elected officials stop serving actual PEOPLE (other than themselves)?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What an insider trader may look like?

jayhawk88: He's just boostrapping himself to success, using all the skills and information at his disposal to feed his family. Why you wanna keep a white male down?

The case is the first of its kind involving a member of Congress.

Lol, that ought to tell you something right there.

I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications against both parties.

D_Evans45: 2 senators voted against getting rid of insider trading. R-etards obviously. Other members of the GOP were warning Republicans not to amend the bill, because other Pubs were set and ready to foil it with bullshiat amendments. Crooked old fuhks.

Yea.. this is definitely a Republican-only problem...

Wasn't there an article not too long ago about how our insider trading laws don't apply to members of congress? Is this just an ethics investigation?

RedVentrue: jayhawk88: He's just boostrapping himself to success, using all the skills and information at his disposal to feed his family. Why you wanna keep a white male down?

The case is the first of its kind involving a member of Congress.

Lol, that ought to tell you something right there.

I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications investigations against both parties.

EnviroDude: Otherwise, I will need a farker to tell me why they are exempt and this guy isn't.

The key phrase here is "probable cause". It's in TFA. It has a meaning.

I know it annoys some people that investigations can't be launched on gut feelings, but that's the way the law is. Sometimes that means questionable behaviors like those engaged in by Pelosi's husband go uncontested, but I'd prefer that to knowing that somebody could launch an investigation against me just because they think "something seems off".

sxacho: Wasn't there an article not too long ago about how our insider trading laws don't apply to members of congress? Is this just an ethics investigation?

They didn't until just recently. The House passed a bill outlawing insider trading by its members just yesterday. The Senate one happened a bit before that. Hurray for outlawing things that should have been illegal long before this!

Joseph Kennedy was head of the SEC so no big deal right?

cig-mkr: Another example of the "let them eat cake" attitude from our Representatives. They seem to have the mind set that there are two sets of rules, the ones for you and the ones for them. These are very few people in Washington that actually care about their constitutes, most are there only to line their own pockets even further.
They need to pass a bill that states that "any law that we pass, shall pertain to congress also".
Off load the perks that they have that we can't use too.
Pelosi pissed me off for flying back and forth to California on our dime, using one of the governments aircraft and crew, stocked with the best liquor every weekend. And what's with the government fling first class on domestic airlines? If they want to fly first class, let them pay the difference between first and cattle car.
/ off my soapbox

If she went through TSA they might find that her highness is a terrorist.

The interesting thing I saw is that there's now (since 2009) an Office of Congressional Ethics that is completely independent from the House Ethics Committee. And this is their first big case, it looks like.

Here's the 60 Minutes story that kicked the whole thing off, btw:

Link (new window)

What's odd about this is that Congress (corruptly, of course) explicitly excluded itself and its staff from insider trading laws. I'm happy to see charges brought against anyone who does think kind of bullshiat -- insider trading is little more than fraud, really. But it's surprises me that it's only one Congressman when in reality the overwhelming majority of them are this corrupt.

Lt. Col. Angus: FTFA:

Most of his investments are for less than $10,000, and almost all involve options rather than stock purchases. The options allowed Bachus to buy or sell stocks at certain prices in the future - betting that the value of those stocks will rise or fall.

To me, this is WORSE than just buying the stocks. He's betting which stocks will rise and fall, and is in an "oversight" position that allows influence of that very thing.

At what point did our elected officials stop serving actual PEOPLE (other than themselves)?

Since that's what all stock purchases do - the only reason to buy a stock is a bet that it will go up, and the only reason to short a stock is to bet that it will go down - this isn't worse; it's exactly the same thing.

And it's bad.

RedVentrue: jayhawk88: He's just boostrapping himself to success, using all the skills and information at his disposal to feed his family. Why you wanna keep a white male down?

The case is the first of its kind involving a member of Congress.

Lol, that ought to tell you something right there.

I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications against both parties.

That'd be awesome, but when the last time you saw a RedVentrue: RedVentrue: jayhawk88: He's just boostrapping himself to success, using all the skills and information at his disposal to feed his family. Why you wanna keep a white male down?

The case is the first of its kind involving a member of Congress.

Lol, that ought to tell you something right there.

I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications investigations against both parties.

investication-a welcome break from the daily grind of our national and state reps, afforded due to investigative proceedings. Usually results in a limply-worded reprimand, but on occasion can lead to promotion and cushy spot in whatever industry that rep might happen to have overseen or been charged to regulate.

There is and there isn't government oversight. The Office of Congressional Ethics has no subpoena power.

jeebus, sorry 'bout that clusterfark, just getting my caffeine this morning

I knew it was one of those guys!

/just a gut feeling....

EnviroDude: Does this mean Nancy Pelosi and her husband are next on the investigation list? One can only hope so.

Otherwise, I will need a farker to tell me why they are exempt and this guy isn't.

I think its fair to say that the majority of people that would like criminals in congress investigated and jailed, and hopefully be both relieved of their profits and fined, regardless of political affiliation. Perhaps majority is wrong... maybe better to say that there are a lot more people that would like to see that happen based on behavior rather than party affiliation. My basis for that is that the the record-low congressional approval ratings are entirely non-partisan -- the polled public pretty much hates congress as a whole, not along party lines.

Of course, you wont get that view on any news... but then again, the news media is almost entirely inspired by and focused on check-the-party-first partisan douchebags like you. You can definitely find douchebags on either side of the aisle, but at the end of the day, what matters is that you are a douchebag; and not which side you are on.

Bachus isn't getting singled out because he is a republican. He is singled out because he is the chairman of the house Financial Service Committee. His title/role/responsibilities make it particularly egregious. In Jerry Sandusky terms, there are a lot of child molesters, and they are all terrible people; but Jerry Sandusky is in a special class of people that founded a troubled-children charity to hunt for victims. Among financial crime criminals, Bachus is a Sandusky-level criminal. His crimes don't excuse the crimes of others, but he is still worth singling out as the worst guy... if for no other reason, to purse him first and most aggressively, to set a precedent for punishing the rest of the criminals as harshly as possible.

pursepursue

The office also is investigating whether Bachus violated congressional rules that prohibit members of Congress from using their public positions for private gain.

DUH......THROW THEM ALL OUT ......and into Gitmo

sxacho: Wasn't there an article not too long ago about how our insider trading laws don't apply to members of congress? Is this just an ethics investigation?

I'm sure that if he is found guilty of ethics violations, he will receive a very strongly worded letter. That should put a stop to all of this nonsense once and for all!

RedVentrue: I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications against both parties.

Well, I'm hoping that a nine ton sack of cash falls from the sky and lands in my front yard, but I sure as hell don't think it'll happen.

Splinshints: EnviroDude: Otherwise, I will need a farker to tell me why they are exempt and this guy isn't.

The key phrase here is "probable cause". It's in TFA. It has a meaning.

I know it annoys some people that investigations can't be launched on gut feelings, but that's the way the law is. Sometimes that means questionable behaviors like those engaged in by Pelosi's husband go uncontested, but I'd prefer that to knowing that somebody could launch an investigation against me just because they think "something seems off".

But that really doesn't answer the question EnviroDude will inevitably dance around if he posts more in this thread, "yeah but how does that help the GOP consolidate their power and/or hurt liberals in general?"

EnviroDude: Splinshints: EnviroDude: Otherwise, I will need a farker to tell me why they are exempt and this guy isn't.

The key phrase here is "probable cause". It's in TFA. It has a meaning.

I know it annoys some people that investigations can't be launched on gut feelings, but that's the way the law is. Sometimes that means questionable behaviors like those engaged in by Pelosi's husband go uncontested, but I'd prefer that to knowing that somebody could launch an investigation against me just because they think "something seems off".

You need to tel that to 60 minutes. I thought they did a nice job exposing the insider trading of Mr. Nancy Pelosi. Did you miss that segment?

Crotchrocket Slim: But that really doesn't answer the question EnviroDude will inevitably dance around if he posts more in this thread, "yeah but how does that help the GOP consolidate their power and/or hurt liberals in general?"

SO you are saying that is okay for the democrats to remain in power regardless of their corruption? I bet you that you think Obama did a good thing signing the NDAA too.

/liberals: Is there anything they aren't hypocrites about?

At least Neo-Cons will TELL you that they want to screw you.

Almost like a sort of... committee on finances.

Lt. Col. Angus: RedVentrue: I'm hoping this opens the door to many more insider trading / corruption investications against both parties.

Well, I'm hoping that a nine ton sack of cash falls from the sky and lands in my front yard, but I sure as hell don't think it'll happen.

It'll happen if that is your price that Wall Street buys your soul for.

You know what nine tons of cash is worth?

Nine tons.

WHAR IRONIC TAG WHAR

/if all the Ironic tag greenlights in the past week have shown

cig-mkr: firefly212: cig-mkr: RedVentrue: cig-mkr: Another example of the "let them eat cake" attitude from our Representatives. They seem to have the mind set that there are two sets of rules, the ones for you and the ones for them. These are very few people in Washington that actually care about their constitutes, most are there only to line their own pockets even further.
They need to pass a bill that states that "any law that we pass, shall pertain to congress also".
Off load the perks that they have that we can't use too.
Pelosi pissed me off for flying back and forth to California on our dime, using one of the governments aircraft and crew, stocked with the best liquor every weekend. And what's with the government fling first class on domestic airlines? If they want to fly first class, let them pay the difference between first and cattle car.
/ off my soapbox

If she went through TSA they might find that her highness is a terrorist.

OMG ! I do hope that you are not suggesting that the elite should be subjected to the TSA !
I wonder if the people in congress have their own area of the airport or do they rub elbows with the common folk? I know that they aren't worried about parking and taking a shuttle, they have a limo service I'm sure.

I'm ok with people like her flying privately on my dime because between them and the security entourage, to say nothing of the press and people who hate them, It'd make flying commercially a nightmare for everyone else. If it's some unrecognizeable person from the department of agriculture or interior, then fine, fly em commercially, but having someone like Pelosi or Boehner pass through would effectively shut an airport down for an hour.

And that was at a cost of $1,000,000 per year according to this:
Link (new window)

Would be worth it to see Pelosi vs. TSA without her congressional creds. :)

EnviroDude: You need to tel that to 60 minutes. I thought they did a nice job exposing the insider trading of Mr. Nancy Pelosi. Did you miss that segment?

I don't have the authority to investigate anybody so it doesn't really matter, now does it? Maybe you should take it up with the non-partisan ethics committee that apparently doesn't feel there's a case to be made.

Why do people flip out so much over Pelosi? Sure she's left of even most liberals, but to hear people talk you'd think that she was going to personally take their property, guns, and bank accounts and hand them to illegals, and treat lukewarm supporters as if they'd die for her. She's annoying, but it's not like she has unlimited power in a Congress dominated by Republican filibusters and a fractured Democratic party.

Hillary Clinton and Obama get the same fanatical treatment, so maybe it's just an outgrowth of "blacks and women need to know their place."