More Shenanigans
The 1st rule of "No Politics..."
1. No Politics
However, I wonder if there's a standing rule of what can be discussed when there are no sports to discuss.
Could you have put any less effort into creating a post?
March 20th, 2020 at 12:10 PM ^
Amazing post
March 20th, 2020 at 12:19 PM ^
My bad. I know. It takes two clicks instead of one to open. It’s ALOT to ask of anyone in these trying times.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51976484
March 20th, 2020 at 12:23 PM ^
Wrong..
Argue.
Last Word.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:59 PM ^
If it was only about the click I don’t think you’d have 14 negs already:
1. Crappy tittle
2. Complete lack of any explanation of title in the post
3. Which is probably why you went down the path of 1 and 2 - not even the slightest attempt to focus in a non-political way. Sure it is hard if not impossible to avoid politics in a coronavirus discussion, but this isn’t that. This is a discussion of corruption in politics. While I have plenty of opinions on the topic, this seems far over the line even in these unusuall circumstances.
There's nothing worse than crappy tittles.
very true. i’ve now wasted 5 minutes trying to figure out a humorous mistyping of typist to use in a response to your post but to no avail?
I knew a girl that had crappy tittle. Known as skunk nips in the north country.
Also known as booby crap
March 21st, 2020 at 12:13 PM ^
Maybe saggy tittles are worse.
No please, continue. You're doing so well...
OK, you've had multiple chances to post an actual link and failed each time, so I'm guessing you don't know how.
Highlight your text and then, in the comment box, click on the little chain-link button (next to the italic button) and paste your web address in the box that pops up.
Here you go:
March 20th, 2020 at 12:11 PM ^
My guess is the first discussion will be the absence of a clickable link.
But yeah, politicians gonna shenanigan. That said, the public information was pretty substantial, so what's cheesy here is they (Burr in particular) were selling while they were telling people everything was fine.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:26 PM ^
My favorite line is this one
Mrs Loefller has called The Daily Beast's investigation a “ridiculous and baseless attack”. In a statement she added that decisions about her investments were made by “multiple third party advisors without [her or her husband’s] knowledge or consent”. It was 3 million dollars traded without her consent. Hmm...
If it's in a blind trust that's how it works.
My trading activity is restricted because my wife manages an investment portfolio for an insurance company. I would imagine the spouse of the NYSE CEO would be severely restricted, hence the use of a trust to remove her (and him) from the investment decision-making process.
If it's in a blind trust, that's how it works.
A regular revocable or living trust allows the trust makers to control the assets.
You're right. I edited my reply to include that important detail. Thank you for the correction.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:11 PM ^
It's bad, but I wouldn't say any of us are surprised. Senators gonna sen.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:28 PM ^
Correct - there are also 4 at this point - Diane Feinstein - CA, Richard Burr - NC, Kelley Loeffler - GA, and James Inhofe - OK.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/opinion/burr-loeffler-stocks-coronavirus.html
Feinstein, Ron Johnson (R-WI), and Inhofe have been cleared.
"Feinstein has said that she did not attend the Jan. 24 briefing; her stock was in a blind trust, which means she didn’t make the decision to sell; and the transaction lost her money, because the trust was selling shares of a biotechnology stock, the value of which has since risen. Inhofe’s transactions were part of a systematic selling of stocks that he started after he became chairman of the Armed Services Committee. Johnson sold stock in his family’s plastic business, as part of a process that has been occurring for months; his sale also occurred well after stock market began falling."
On the other hand, Burr is 100% guilty. Loeffler (claims someone else handles her holdings) is perhaps guilty and certainly worthy of an SEC investigation. Burr should resign immediately. Like right now. And really should be in jail too.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:28 PM ^
America is broken, they broke the law and should be in prison...calling it “Shenanigans” is pathetic
March 20th, 2020 at 12:35 PM ^
Congress isn’t bound by insider trading laws. It’s bullshit. It’s also bullshit when people comment on stuff like this when they don’t know the facts.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:50 PM ^
Let's all pump the brakes, and here's a fact:
The Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act (Pub.L. 112–105, S. 2038, 126 Stat. 291, enacted April 4, 2012) is an Act of Congress designed to combat insider trading. It was signed into law by President Barack Obama on April 4, 2012.
Much of the law you cite was promptly overwritten by Congress and signed into law by the same President. They still have trading privileges on inside information the rest of us do not have. https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496734/how-congress-quietly-overhauled-its-insider-trading-law
They literally are. There's an act that stipulates that it's illegal (Barr was one of 3 senators to vote against it, actually).
Man, it's bullshit when people comment on stuff like this when they don't know the facts.
You’re a moron, yes they have laws against government officials using their insider knowledge for gain... it’s called The Stock Act
You're agreeing with me?
Aha! Hate when they give these laws names that make it so hard to understand what they're all about!
Not hard to keep track of what's going on when one considers they name it the opposite of what it truly is.
It's actually quite comical. Think of a law in the last 20 years which is an acronym or a cute, human understandable name... the execution of that law has had the oppositve effect.
That's a good rule of thumb. Assume any law actually has the opppsite effect one would expect from reading the title (either intentionally or unintentionally).
March 20th, 2020 at 12:36 PM ^
Yes, because it's so righteous to convict people without all the facts. Let's just pump the fucking brakes. If it turns out they are guilty then hang the fuckers. If they are innocent, then so be it. I'm sure you would want the same considerations.
I don't get it...they are guilty.
You're a scumbag.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:27 PM ^
Speaking of shenanigans...
The Trump administration is asking state labor officials to delay releasing the precise number of unemployment claims they are fielding, an indication of how uneasy policymakers are about further roiling a stock market already plunging in response to the coronavirus outbreak.
In an email sent Wednesday, the Labor Department instructed state officials to only “provide information using generalities to describe claims levels (very high, large increase)” until the department releases the total number of national claims next Thursday. LINK
What really "roils" the markets if people suspect the government is playing a shell game with the truth. It's the worst of both worlds: the government doesn't have the authoritarian powers of a place like China to ignore any semblance of civil liberties and just do what has to be done, but it doesn't have the credibility a democracy is expected to have with it's people, either. You'd like to have at least one or the other in a crisis.
(Personally I'd like the authoritarian powers, there are a few other things I'd like to fix under penalty of torture, such as bad MGoBlog titles and unnecessary remakes of classic films like "The Longest Yard.")
March 20th, 2020 at 12:38 PM ^
The number is "very high" no one doubts that - do you assume that any one person has all the data on hand when the number is probably 10x more than a normal timeframe?
Given human proclivity towards hyperbole, I'd rather get accurate-if-vague info than have someone spew out a frustrated "100 million!" answer and really screw things up.
This isn't shenanigans, this is let's focus on the most important things first, like helping the unemployed people rather than get all the data collated.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:45 PM ^
Your interpretation of "precise number" is a little different than mine.
This what the states do every month. They don't pull a number out of their ass. They have a total number and they report it to the federal government, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the national totals to the country, good or bad.
If you think everything is working as normal at the moment, you must be living in two weeks ago. Everything I'm doing is slower, with really high variance, with data I don't trust because it doesn't look like it's ever looked like before.
It seems reasonable to me that other people like me that do similar things with unemployment data are having the same issues. I understand it's a line of attack to that other side of the country you dislike, but try to put some of that aside for a few weeks.
The Chicago Tribune business section today had an article on how 64,000 unemployment claims were filed Monday-Wed this past week and that's way above normal. Not to hard to get the numbers because states are required to do this as part of recording and paying unemployment. Payments get reported to the federal government and you get a W2 form for unemployment benefits received during each tax year.
So, given the data is out there and accurate, it's not a good look to try and obscure it. Honesty is the best policy, right?
"Not to hard to get the numbers because states are required to do this as part of recording and paying unemployment."
Lots of people are required to do lots of things for lots of reasons, in a normal environment. When many of those people are locked in a closet for 5 days, lots of those things won't get done, at least not on the same timeline. That doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me.
Markets hate uncertainty. Would you rather they traded based on the facts or the rumors, especially when they know the data is out there and available.
Yeah what I'm saying is that the data may not be available, for very understandable reasons. So they may not actually know that the data is out there and available.
Here's the very obvious hypothetical: they send data out that they don't trust and unemployment is lower than expected - the market reacts and good news spreads throughout the world. Then the data is revised later and show very bad numbers, and all that reverses out. You've now whipsawed the market when you might have just said, "hey it's going to take a little longer to get this."
Is this really that difficult to understand? This is MUCH worse than the mortgage crisis. There are men and women who are supposed to put this together who've very understandably peaced out for a few days. Or they're not working at their normal level, also very understandable. Or they're taking care of their sick parents who are shut in. This seems understandable to me.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:30 PM ^
corrupt government officials gonna corrupt.
How shocking.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:52 PM ^
Mandatory
March 20th, 2020 at 12:32 PM ^
Nice job.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:38 PM ^
Insane how Fox News is now calling for their heads, but Trump has 10,000,000 instances of conflict of interest or general corruption and that's just cool by them. We're being led by actual morons.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:50 PM ^
The cool part is you get to vote in 7 short months