General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBurr, who sold stock before pandemic, voted in 2012 against banning insider trading for Congress
Sen. Richard Burr, who sold stock before pandemic, voted in 2012 against banning insider trading for Congress
Timothy Bella
March 20, 2020 at 5:22 a.m. EDT
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) thought little of the 2012 bill that would ban insider trading for Congress, congressional staff and other federal officials.
The bill, aimed at prohibiting stock trading based on nonpublic information gleaned on Capitol Hill, overwhelmingly passed in the Senate by a 96-to-3 vote before being signed into law by President Barack Obama. Burr, one of the three senators to vote against the measure, described himself as a brave soul for going against the bill, according to a transcript of the radio interview posted to his Senate website.
I mean, its insane, he said of the insider-trading legislation for members of Congress.
His sentiments from eight years ago have become relevant again after Thursdays report that Burr sold a significant share of his stocks last month before the coronavirus outbreak upended the markets.
more...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/03/20/coronavirus-richard-burr-stock/
3catwoman3
(24,043 posts)...do NOT faint from shock.
BKDem
(1,733 posts)Say it with me. Lock him up!
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Torches and pitchforks time
When we gonna get a comment from this jackhole
ProfessorGAC
(65,168 posts)...is this really what that law was about.
Not a lawyer, but having worked in mgmt for a couple large publicly traded companies, I thought the law was about having material, non- public information.
By February, wasn't the risk of COVID19 public knowledge?
I'm not defending Burr, by any means but unless the 2012 law is different than the insider laws that affect employees & execs, not sure he would lose in court.
denbot
(9,901 posts)What the public was being told by those in authority was that this will disappear, hoax, politically motivated et al.
That is what was public knowledge disseminated through our government at the time he dumped his stock.
ProfessorGAC
(65,168 posts)Read more carefully. I specifically said I wasn't defending.
I'm questioning whether he can be prosecuted.
What part of me calling Burr slimy, in the title of my post, escaped you?
denbot
(9,901 posts)Hey, it wasnt a robbery.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Chainfire
(17,640 posts)It is just good business. Why would anyone want to serve without perks?