Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#28,485
#28,485
Stew Cook said:
Can you confirm she isn't (the original claim). Or are you just biased agains't the counter assumptions?

"Both Sides" Weezer's bias is showing once again.
Click to expand...
lmao I've called out both sides, for different things. Have you? All I've seen is you assume the worst from the right, and the best from the left.
 
#28,487
#28,487
titansvolsfaninga said:
But you don't see how donald is making money off of going to his own properties over and over and over again? That does not strike you as wrong?
Click to expand...

Mar a lago is like trumps second home not unlike other presidents with Camp David, Kennebunkport, or the Bush’s Ranch. Get over the fact that it cost money to move and protect the President. The thought that he is taking time off to make a profit is ridiculous. He’s already got all the money he or his family would ever need. Good grief
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol
#28,497
#28,497
1972 Grad said:
We will need to see the dates of the meeting, the dates of the transactions, when the info from the meeting leaked out, and who makes the trades. Until then, I couldn't convict her or Feinstein or any of them.
Click to expand...
There will definitely be an investigation. Of course, the dates are significant but I don't think who made the trades is significant. If they were acting upon knowledge that she had obtained in a private Senate briefing, then that is not sufficient cover for her. What makes this look even worse for her (and this is just speaking in terms of optics here) is that her husband is Jeff Sprecher, the CEO of the company which owns the New York Stock Exchange. These transactions were incredibly ballsy. On it's surface, it looks like she was emboldened by her husband's position... like the laws don't apply to them.
 
#28,498
#28,498
BowlBrother85 said:
The timing of the purchase of $206,774 worth of stock in chemical giant DuPont de Nemours in four transactions in late February and early March, which was just after she had attended a private, Senate meeting on the Coronavirus in China, does make it clear that either she or someone working on her behalf was acting upon non-public information that she had received. Her choice of what to dump and what to buy, could only have been influenced by knowledge obtained from this meeting. DuPont had performed poorly on Wall Street lately, but the company is a major supplier of personal protective gear, which is obviously now in high demand... and she knew would be in high demand following the Senate meeting. Her denials of having no involvement in these transactions are not credible.

She has violated the living hell out of the Stock Act.
Click to expand...

"Someone working on her behalf" like any competent investment manager? Buy Dupont because they manufacture protective gear that "is in high demand"? Who could POSSIBLY foresee that might be a good investment?

Uh, ANYONE that can do 1 + 1 arithmetic, which includes every damned person associated with stock trading. LMAO!
analysts-ratings.img

DuPont de Nemours Inc.

When analysts are overwhelming saying buy and no one is saying sell or underweighting it - three months ago and today - who would ever think to actually buy a large, stable corporation in time of economic crisis? SMDH

But far be it from me to dissuade yet another excellent conspiracy meme; proceed!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top