Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @04:57PM
(#49188905)
“If you live in New York, call. Call the Manhattan District Attorney at 212-335-9000 and ask the office to open a criminal inquiry into the April 2, 2025 sale.”
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by paulpauper on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @05:16PM
(#49189121)
This is not as salacious as it sounds
The deadline required a sale by early May. Nothing required a sale on the one day that mattered.
This is the crux.
Right, she had to meet a deadline in 90 days, so statically speaking, there was a 2/3 chance of selling it before April than between April-May. Also, in the 90-day window DJT stock fell from $31 to $25, but she actually happened to sell at close to the bottom, at $18.5. DJT would actually surge after she sold to $25. In other words, her timing was much closer to the bottom of the range.
Moreover, knowledge of the impending tariffs had been long public. She, along with others, presumably knew Trump would enact tariffs, but the question was, how big. I don't see much evidence of her acting on non-public information, but rather that her timing was very bad.
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @07:06PM
(#49190281)
Bondi “sold on April 2…Trump announced the tariffs that evening, after the market closed.”
This is damning timing. At the very least, it merits subpoenas and investigation. The fact that a Congressman called for as much and was ignored, without recusal, by the accused also seems to suggest corruption charges.
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @08:21PM
(#49190841)
> Are you seriously suggesting that there is corruption within the current administration?
Cases with a clean throughline from evidence through the offence all the way to a specific state law aren't, at least to my lay understanding, as common as the crime.
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by sgarman on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @05:30PM
(#49189306)
I guess tangentially related, if you do insider trading but do it poorly is it still a crime? I feel that if the answer is yes then your explanation about how the timing was bad isn't super relevant.
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by throwawaypath on Wednesday August 05, 2026 @05:20PM
(#49189164)
"Martha Stewart went to federal prison for something smaller than this."
Martha Stewart and her coconspirator went to jail for lying to the FBI. Not going to read an article when the first sentence gets a basic fact of the case wrong.
Re:Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading
by throwawaypath on Thursday August 06, 2026 @11:37AM
(#49198148)
My OP that was [flagged]:
"Martha Stewart went to federal prison for something smaller than this."
Martha Stewart and her coconspirator went to jail for lying to the FBI. Not going to read an article when the first sentence gets a basic fact of the case wrong.
The deadline required a sale by early May. Nothing required a sale on the one day that mattered.
This is the crux.
Right, she had to meet a deadline in 90 days, so statically speaking, there was a 2/3 chance of selling it before April than between April-May. Also, in the 90-day window DJT stock fell from $31 to $25, but she actually happened to sell at close to the bottom, at $18.5. DJT would actually surge after she sold to $25. In other words, her timing was much closer to the bottom of the range.
Moreover, knowledge of the impending tariffs had been long public. She, along with others, presumably knew Trump would enact tariffs, but the question was, how big. I don't see much evidence of her acting on non-public information, but rather that her timing was very bad.
This is damning timing. At the very least, it merits subpoenas and investigation. The fact that a Congressman called for as much and was ignored, without recusal, by the accused also seems to suggest corruption charges.
Cases with a clean throughline from evidence through the offence all the way to a specific state law aren't, at least to my lay understanding, as common as the crime.
Martha Stewart and her coconspirator went to jail for lying to the FBI. Not going to read an article when the first sentence gets a basic fact of the case wrong.
Jail ≠ prison.
"Five months in jail for Stewart"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3900401.stm
"Martha Stewart went to federal prison for something smaller than this."
Martha Stewart and her coconspirator went to jail for lying to the FBI. Not going to read an article when the first sentence gets a basic fact of the case wrong.