Pam Bondi Implicated in as Much as $5.5M in Insider Trading

Posted by JumpCrisscross 1 day ago

Counter37Comment12OpenOriginal

Comments

Comment by JumpCrisscross 1 day ago

“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.”

Comment by morninglight 1 day ago

PARDON ME!

Comment by paulpauper 1 day ago

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.

Comment by sgarman 1 day ago

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.

Comment by Simulacra 1 day ago

It also doesn't seem to be anything different than members of Congress.

Comment by znpy 21 hours ago

Don’t take a look at nancy pelosi’s stock returns! /s

Comment by JumpCrisscross 1 day ago

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.

Comment by andrewinardeer 1 day ago

Are you seriously suggesting that there is corruption within the current administration?

Comment by JumpCrisscross 1 day ago

> 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.

Comment by throwawaypath 1 day ago

[flagged]

Comment by treetalker 1 day ago

> Martha Stewart and her coconspirator went to jail for lying to the FBI.

Jail ≠ prison.

Comment by throwawaypath 1 day ago

Too US-centric, and English is not my first language.

"Five months in jail for Stewart"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3900401.stm

Comment by throwawaypath 15 hours ago

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.