How to Illegally Profit From a Pandemic: Insider Trading! (LegalEagle’s Real Law Review)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 тра 2024
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
The market is going to crash. Should we warn people? I have a better idea...
The first 500 Legal Eagles get 2 months of unlimited learning on Skillshare for FREE: legaleagle.link/skillshare
Link to the Gates Foundation COVID19 Funds:
www.gatesfoundation.org/phila...
⚖️⚖️⚖️Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my PRELAW COURSE:
legaleagle.teachable.com/p/pr...
©©©©© Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you (15% OFF!):
www.copyrightcourse.com/yt
★ A Few of My Favorite Things★
🕵️♂️My Custom Suits: legaleagle.link/indochino
👔My Ties: fave.co/2ImLY9I
📎My Tie Clips/Bars: amzn.to/2WIQ6EE
🔲My Pocket Squares: amzn.to/2UfsKtL
💈My Hair Product amzn.to/2Ui2aQx
📸My Video Camera Setup www.amazon.com/shop/legaleagle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary from Wikipedia:
The President of the United States is elected to have that position for a period, or "term", that lasts for four years. The Constitution had no limit on how many times a person could be elected as president. The nation’s first president, George Washington chose not to try to be elected for a third term. This suggested that two terms were enough for any president. Washington’s two-term limit became the unwritten rule for all Presidents until 1940.
In 1940, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt won a third term. He also won a fourth term in 1944. Roosevelt was president through the Great Depression of the 1930s and almost all of World War II. He held approval ratings in the mid-50% to the low 60% ranges over his many years in office. Roosevelt died of a cerebral hemorrhage in April of 1945, just months after the start of his fourth term. Soon after, Republicans in Congress began the work of creating Amendment XXII. Roosevelt was the first and only President to serve more than two terms.
The amendment was passed by Congress in 1947, and was ratified by the states on February 27, 1951. The Twenty-Second Amendment says a person can only be elected to be president two times for a total of eight years. It does make it possible for a person to serve up to ten years as president. This can happen if a person (most likely the Vice-President) takes over for a president who can no longer serve their term. If this person serves two years or less of the preceding President’s term, he or she may serve for two more four-year terms. If he or she served more than two years of the last President's term, the new President can serve only one full four-year term. Under the language of the amendment, the President at the time of its ratification (Harry Truman) was exempt from the two-term limitation. Truman served nearly all of Roosevelt's unexpired fourth term and then was elected President once, serving his own four year term.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to Real Law Review by LegalEagle; a series where I try to tackle the most important legal issues of the day. If you have a suggestion for the next topic leave your comment below.
And if you disagree, be sure to leave your comment in the form of an OBJECTION!
Remember to make your comments Stella-appropriate. Stella is the LegalBeagle and she wields the gavel of justice. DO NOT MESS WITH STELLA.
★More series on LegalEagle★
Real Lawyer Reacts: goo.gl/hw9vcE
Laws Broken: goo.gl/PJw3vK
Law 101: goo.gl/rrzFw3
Real Law Review: goo.gl/NHUoqc
All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Typical legal disclaimer from a lawyer (occupational hazard): This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos!
========================================================
★ Tweet me @legaleagleDJ / legaleagledj
★ More vids on Facebook: ➜ / legaleaglereacts
★ Stella’s Insta: / stellathelegalbeagle
★ For promotional inquiries please reach out here: legaleagle@standard.tv
🦠What should I cover next?
📚Get 2 months of unlimited learning on Skillshare for FREE: skl.sh/legaleagle25
Nice video, it must just be a coincidence that it's April 1st ✨
you should see how many laws are broken in the dark knight rises
ua-cam.com/video/kYSHmYjc8Sg/v-deo.html
Do with the Video what you want ,Just ask the Guy in posession of it.
McDonald's coffee lawsuit. Reality vs popular legend. A update to your Roundup video would also be interesting with extortion charges being filed against the lawyers who sued Monsanto.
Double Jeopardy, the movie or the just the legal questions surrounding it, your pick.
You know we're in unprecedented times when even the lawyers start talking about beheading the ruling class.
Well, lawyers are technically still considered specialists nowadays. Not all of them live like in TV shows, you know? They'd lose some clients though.
Fidel Castro was a lawyer.
@@robertjarman3703 and?
@@TheArklyte He beheaded people of the ruling class.
The French revolution disagress
“Time to get out the pitchforks and guillotines.” - This is the legal advice I’ve been waiting for!
Insert obligatory not legal advice disclaimer
Not till the quarantine's over.
Sounds like a good business startup. Made in America, by Americans, for Americans . . . for Americans. I bet it will be booming sooner than we all think. We can have an after party at the Let Them Eat Cakery Bakery.
I'll bring the torches!
If you'll excuse me, I need to go buy stock in Pitchforks and Guillotines Inc.
Can someone please gif "This is what happens when the rulemakers make rules about themselves" because I feel like we're gonna need it.
"See where incorrect breathing GETS YOU"
Luis Suazo, thank you!
Unfortunately this isn't the first time we've needed that saying, nor will it be the last.
Down with the police!
www.kapwing.com/videos/5fab3b6b8e203000ddb83440
I made this one with text, if you want
"If you want to benefit from inside trading without actually doing it, pay close attention to how Congressmen spend their money and mimic them."
-Guy I knew since high school who does nothing but by and sell his own stocks.
I actually believe him now.
How do you monitor how they spend money is it public information
@@alexthomas6602 Probably because at the time it was. Congressmen are public citizens because of the office they hold. Also, the houses leak like spaghetti strainers.
@@That80sGuy1972 so asking for a friend how would you get a hold of these records
@@alexthomas6602 I never did it personally. I just used to talk to people who did. Lawyers and political activists can point you the right direction, just don't trust their own printouts. I don't look into it myself because I don't want to be put on a list... well, another list. A former friend who shuns me now told me he cannot associate with me because my 20s behavior put me on a list and he needs his security clearance to keep his job. I'll email the broker now and ask that.
@@That80sGuy1972 Jesus what did you do that talking to you causes people to lose their security clearance
Can we just take a minute to reflect on the fact that Congress members were allowed to trade on classified knowledge for personal gain all the way up till 2012? That wasnt that long ago
In americs everything is about money. In other western countries healthcare is available for everyone because a healthy population is important. In america it is a business. Rich people have the best healthcare on the globe. And 13 million have none. So many others don't get important surgeries or procedures because they can't afford them.
In other countries they aim for rehabilitation in prisons so that convicts become useful members of society again. In america its a business. They aim to institutionalize the convicts so they return and can be profit centers for them. Result is the highest prison population on earth.
Now you see polticians around the globe are most of the time power hungry and greedy. But in america politic is a business. Politicians don't work for the people, they don't pay them. They work for the corporations, who can afford to lobby them. Money rules america.
So why does it surprise you? The people who make the laws make their own rules. I would assume that they would benefit themselfs heavily in this system. And they pretty much do
Thank Liz Warren for ending that free ride.
@@gingerkid1048 Thanks, Liz Warren..
Now vote Bernie pls
Please. It was a bipartisan effort. He even said only 3 voted against it.
@@clocked0 No communists for me. Gulag's aren't my thing.
For a moment, I thought this would be an April Fool's joke where you would give us fake tips on how to profit off of people's misery.
Is your profile cousin braeburn? That's awesome.
It's very real
I can tell you how to do that; first become an establishment politician, then sell your soul.
Well, we are the fools!
I have a tip for you: Find a store that still has toilet paper in stock, but the whole supply, then go to the nearest Stop & Shop parking lot and sell them for $20 a roll:) cha-ching.
Loeffler and Perdue losing today make this video all the sweeter.
Indeed.
YYYYYEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!
I'm actually baffled at how legal this was until _very recently._ And yet even now, it's December and those people as far as I know haven't suffered any legal consequences for this *extremely* immoral abuse of their power.
Missed opportunity to offer 50% off all Indochino suits for people working from home during lockdown (since they only need the top half)
I'll buy a 1 1/2 (1/2 of 3) piece suit
Let me guess, these people will never suffer any real consequences?
They might; we're in the middle of a crisis, and sacrificing their own might earn them a few brownie points with people outside of the upper class. If a recession gets started especially, the knives might come out.
Yes, but it's fun to sit here for 20 minutes and hear about the laws that pretend to keep the system fair.
worse case scenario, they resign and keep their millions. But most likely they will keep a low profile until this blow over.
@@fankrys Actually, the worst-case scenario is they have to forfeit their ill-gotten gains plus 50%. Also there is the possibility of time behind bars. I consider both unlikely, but both are deserved.
Yup, because ‘Merica!
Virgin breadtube: "Now we're obviously not advocating violence, but something needs to be done about this."
Chad LegalEagle: "Time for some senatorial heads to roll!"
"Yes i was shown the treasure map and I had it pointed out to me exactly where the treasure was but that I shouldn't dig for it... but its okay guys, I was able to find the treasure by entirely by myself. You can trust me to just store away priveliged information inside my own mind to not use it when it keeps me out of jail."
Burr is my Senator. You bet your butt I called his office calling for his resignation.
That's even less effective than urinating in the wind.
Go get em RJ 👏
I work in Charlotte NC even though I’m a resident in SC. My coworkers and I have already called to.
Loeffler is mine and you bet your butt I called for more than just her resignation. I want to see jail time.
As someone who is sick of American corruption I amend you for doing this!! Imagine if the whole voting population did this! Power in numbers!!!
I just love that this professional lawyer embraced the stonks meme
He leans pretty hard into internet culture. He is a millennial
polititian makes money -> "they must firmly understand the economy"
politician makes corrupt money -> "I have no knowledge of the transactions, others did."
The worst thing is that Loeffler wasn’t even elected, she was appointed.
That means she cant insider trade! Right? :O
Gotta love points as I refer to them
12:40 The worst thing is that Loeffler is running and might win.
You say that as if she couldnt have been anyway
If Martha Stewart can be prosecuted under misappropriation theory, so can these senators.
Or at least, that would be the case if America still lived under the rule of law.
Although to be honest the reason she even went to prison in the first place was because she ain't no snitch
Rule of the law for rich people 😂, stop you are to funny!
Hahaha "still".
I was under the impression she went to jail simply for not cooperating with the investigation. NOT for insider trading. Kinda like... some top official did. and got away with.
To be fair the reason she went to jail was lying to the FBI.
Loeffler's using the Shaggy defense : "It wasn't me"
Shit's been getting people outta trouble for thousands of years
I was thinking of the other Shaggy lol
@@alexricky87 I mean, that's a defense that's gotten quite a few defendants acquitted. "Zoinks! Like, run!"
@@CasaiAgicap
"I hate it when they run!"
- Fillmore
The history of the US relationship with insider trading is fascinating - you can still find economists and business people arguing it should not be illegal. The SEC has been keeping an oral history, interviewing former employees for decades, and they make fascinating reading.
The argument against is pretty interesting, too. Basically that (1) it's really difficult to enforce, and (2) if insiders can openly trade, the market will watch their actions and react, creating a more liquid market that better reflects reality.
Actually, there is something that bothers me alot more than his dumping the stock.
What REALLY bothers me is that he gave helpful, pertinent information to his high-value donors, then turned around and gave his everyday constituents an almost opposite message. Shows who he feels he is actually working for.
And to think my company requires me to take insider training refreshers each year and warn me in no uncertain terms breaking this rule will get me terminated.
Sounds like you work for a good company then
Only senators and executives get to do that.
You’re obviously not a member of Congress.
Burevix the training is to protect the company so if you do it the company isnt held liable.
Also trainings can be written off as an expense or even subsidized by the state
You don't have enough money to get away with it
Speaking as a resident of Georgia, I'd like to say this. Loeffler effectively bought her seat with campaign contributions. Contributions made to Brian Kemp. Kemp is, himself, credibly accused of impropriety in not resigning as Secretary of State during the Gubernatorial election. Which means he was overseeing an election in which he was a candidate. He's also credibly accused of various forms of voter suppression, he gave himself the power to appoint a judge rather than hold an election and recently grabbed more authority, making him the most powerful Georgia Governor in living memory.
Now given Loeffler's lack of experience, her husband's position at the Stock Exchange, her associations Kemp, and the GOP's general embrace of corruption during Trump, I am not inclined to take her defenses seriously.
Sorry, but cleaning up the voter rolls isn't voter suppression... Governor candidate larda** just wanted the job to pay off her massive debts and get rich...
IIRC Loeffler was also a compromise choice with her apolitical background making her more palatable to the increasing number of left leaning voters in Georgia. The other option, and Trump's preferred choice, Doug Collins seems to be very unpopular with the Republican party elites and definitely lacks the crossover appeal it was assumed Loeffler would have.
@@Rammstein0963. Except for the minor detail where the person who organized such efforts in republican states literally stated it was done in an attempt to suppress black voters.
A compromise between Republicans. And Collins is running to primary Loeffler against the wishes of pretty much the entire party. Collins was one of the "stars" of the impeachment hearing. Spending most of his time spitting rapid-fire lies and conspiracy theories. He'll appeal to the Trump supporters. Loeffler was not the choice of *any* voter, so nobody really knows how much support she'll have. But these accusations (and I just ran across an article suggesting that she may have sold off much more stock than previously reported) will not help her, along with her utter lack of experience.
If Democrats are smart, they'll hammer that wedge as hard as they possibly can before the election.
@@Rammstein0963. Courts ruling voter suppression is legal doesn't make it something other than voter suppression. I'm not sure if you've ever been to the South, but these kinds of tactics are par for the course in efforts to reduce the number of people of color voting. In my hometown (also in Georgia) people of color are disproportionately the ones working 9-5 jobs that they can't leave or take a break from to go vote. So, what does the district do? Attempt to restrict early voting to those hours so that people of color have reduced access. I've encountered folks in voter registration drives who don't want to register to vote because they don't want to risk being called for jury duty, which you automatically become eligible to do when you register to vote, because they can't afford the time off work or would be fired (illegally, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen) for having to take that much time off. And don't bother arguing that if they get fired, they can just sue, because needing to sue corporations in order to be able to vote, fulfill your own legal obligations to the courts, and still eke out a poverty-level income is just textbook, indefensible inequality.
There are plenty of legal ways to do voter suppression. "Cleaning up the voter rolls" is a legal way to reduce certain types of votes. Call a spade a spade here. If you're cool with voter suppression, that's your business and there's no need to be dishonest about it. SCOTUS has already ruled various forms of it are fine, so there's institutional support for your position. It's not like you're convincing people who disagree with you that you have any kind of moral high ground anyway, especially when you refer to Stacey Abrams as "governor candidate larda**." Voter suppression is a legitimate political tactic in the US, so you might as well just be honest with yourself and others that you're okay with that.
"Is it a crime?"
Martha Stewart has entered the chat.
"and maybe get out the pitchforks and guillotines"
Well there you've touched on a much more salient and general idea...
"Onto the next criminal! I mean senator." Sir, you repeat yourself.
Criminals have a bad rep these days.
They are the same thing
"Onto the next crimina- I mean, senator."
WOW. Way to blow the candle :P .
There's a difference?
Evan Davis, whether or not you believe there's a difference, you have to be careful to not make defamatory statements about specific senators. Until it is proven that crimes were committed, it's just not wise to call them criminals, especially in a forum such as UA-cam and especially for personal gain such as being a monetized UA-cam creator.
@@---cr8nw And even more when you're a professional lawyer.
Well, SOME politicians certainly seem to benefit from people believing there's no difference between politicians, when clearly there's one side doing a lot more of the bad stuff (Republicans, the Republicans)
this was the moment I paused the video, clicked subscribe, and rang the bell for future notifications....
This dude... Literally the vsauce of legality.
Explains everything so thoroughly. @LegalEagle inspires me to become an attorney.
I wonder how many people have actually started a law career thanks to legal eagle!
*cough cough* loeffler and perdue *cough cough* cmon georgians vote them out *cough cough* go vote early in person or by mail or on january 5th for Ossoff and Warnock *cough cough*
We have, and Perdue and Löffler LOST! Good Riddance to those good for nothing RINOs...
Objection!
It isn't ironic that a man later accused of insider trading had previously opposed insider trading laws.
That's fitting, not ironic.
Yeah, it would be closer to irony if he had voted for the law that he was later convicted of violating.
Objection: He meant the Alanis Morissette sense of ironic.
Irony is when the apparent meaning opposes the intended meaning. A lawmaker profiteering after using a vote to increase that profiteering is not ironic. But it IS ironic when Legal Eagle calls this ironic because he intended it as an example of irony when apparently it isn’t.
If we were certain why he objected to the law then we could say that. If he objected on the grounds of it being an impractical solution that leaves elected officials in an ambiguous legal position then I might agree, and it would be very fitting. Currently elected officials with an area of expertise either have to avoid working in their area of expertise in government, or avoid investments related to their expertise, which is very punishing. In a sense it implies that election implies that the government monopolises their expertise in a way that the private sector does not.
It would be fitting for someone who worried about being vulnerable to appearing to have broken this law to appear to have broken this law. That doesn't mean he did break this law though. It is entirely reasonable for an expert on pandemics (why he is in that position) to adjust their investments early, even without access to CDC information. It is quite possible he worried about being unable to adjust his investments in the case of a pandemic due to appearing to rely on CDC information. This exact corner case would have been considered by him, and taken seriously by pretty much only him, yet here we are in it. A pandemic has crashed the markets, and people who saw this coming could have guarded themselves best. Independent of his position in government, he would expect to be one of the people who saw this coming. If this was his objection then it may even come up as part of his defence.
I certainly believe this should be investigated, but I'm going to hold my outrage for now. It is possible that a person who objected to a rule for a flaw in it that was only every going to be problematic for him (and unlikely to occur anyway) has been hit by that very flaw. These two things are connected, but not because he is guilty.
Before I retired from public service, I held a position that dealt in part with selecting and overseeing contractors. As such, I had to be very careful - even at my low level - when I opened investment accounts. I told both companies that I was not allowed to know what they did with my money. And I had to file a yearly report than confirmed that relationship. I could have suffered penalties if I did not comply with ethics rules and laws.
Enough of the background. But I hope that explains why I am more than frustrated and appalled that these alleged leaders get by with either openly breaking the laws or giving us the appearance of impropriety. I could not even eat lunch with my contractors in a restaurant without running the risk of punishment. This geezer has harrumphed enough. Thanks for your explanation of the situation.
I appreciate you sharing your experience like this; it really helps put things in perspective. I miss when congresspeople & senators had a full department of people to watch them for corruption.
Thanks for sharing Zeyev! That was really interesting!
TBH, I find that appalling. To so drastically limit your right to free association, without even the slightest bit of evenence of wrongdoing, seems completely reprehensible to me.
@@matthewb4988 Public Servitude means giving stuff up for the American people. If you want to get rich off the stock market you shouldn't be a politician. How much extra money you rake in shouldn't be the concern of a public service representative. The fact that you don't know that is completely reprehensible to me.
@@arivolden1989 It has nothing to do with making money. If you tell me I can't have lunch with Jim, who's a great guy, simply because it looks like maybe there's something improper, that's a very bad thing.
The fact that the STOCK act ever made it through committee gives me some hope in congress... I haven't had that in a while now. It feels good.
This video suddenly got suggested to me after the Gamestop issue.
funny af ngl
"This is what happen whens the rule makers make rules for themselves." behold the entire American economic system
@Luis Suazo cool. no hack
1:17 "Is this a crime?" Only if you're poor.
So every crime, then.
Or Martha Stewart
@@namingisdifficult408 She got five months. We put poor people in jail for years for petty theft.
18:04 Loffler wasn’t voted in to represent anyone, she was appointed
Please don't let this story die. Share this vid and if you've got the skills make a meme about it and spread it on reddit etc. Anyway another great video from LE, You rock dude:D
"I totally made the decision to sell from only public information, even though I knew more."
How is that a defense anyone could take seriously?
I'm guessing it boils down to: any reasonable person, with access to only the public knowledge that I had, would have done exactly the same thing.
Still flimsy, but better.
Because you have to prove that he didn't act on public information, the fact that he claims he did and if he can prove that information existed means you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he used private information. Welcome to the flawed justice system where if there's even a 1% chance it's possible they're innocent, you must acquit. That or we need to get off our rears and get the mind probes made and produced, would solve A LOT of cases.
@@Xershade But it's impossible to act solely on public information while at the same time you have knowledge of classified information. That's not how the human mind works. It's impossible to seperate knowledge in such a way. Even if a person is convinced his/her decision was made solely on the publicly available information, knowledge of additional information will inevitably have influenced his/her decision making.
There can be no "in dubio pro reo" in such a case.
So I think the question is did he know there was going to be a shelter in place order implemented in the near future. Because any restriction like that will cause a massive loss and there would be no way it would be public info.
Ernie Fu given that the lockdowns were all initiated by the state governors, there’s nothing there.
Lesson: never trust a senator named burr. Hamilton could have listened to that advice.
They tend to get stuck to your clothes and skin, and sometimes they really hurt to get rid of. And sometimes they shoot you.
Hamilton didn't trust Burr though, Hamilton tried to kill Burr.
@@TheCamoruneGaming Part of the scandal of the way that duel ended was and is the popular belief that Hamilton deliberately aimed high so as to defend his honour without shedding blood. (I don't know whether or not that was actually Hamilton's intent, though)
Let's just shorten that a bit, 'Never trust a Senator.'
@@jeffbenton6183
Wait, so... He *did* throw away his shot?!?
"The United states is rated number 1; most prepared"
Hmm... it doesn't seem like trump was right :/
h0len the wealthy politicians were the most prepared in the world... selling their stocks.
@@josephj6521 We the people should show that we're really in power.
@@josephj6521
Exactly. He meant the U. S. politicians were prepared to make themselves a buck. He just hoped everyone else would fall for it and think he meant to keep the public safe.
@@ferrice General strike.
To be fair, we weren’t hit as badly as we could have been. Take Italy for example. But we’re we prepared enough to be number one on the preparedness list? Hell no.
Then again what’s wrong with giving hope when there is none?
I'm a law student, and I really appreciate your videos! They provide more vindication for my passion for public interest work :)
did a lawyer just advise that we get out the guillotines?
Oh yes he did. 😏
Not the first time. Robespierre was a lawyer too.
Sorta
the figurative guillotines im sure
Bring out the starved hounds.
I honestly don’t even think Congress should be able to invest.
It’s too easy to be corrupt with that.
Yes, but only in a blind trust.
icin4d good point
"Blind Trust "
Agreed, they shouldn't be allowed to invest their money in stocks at all. If they couldn't, they'd be far more motivated to avoid printing money that inflates and devalues the dollar like they do. Corruption at its finest.
Cant stop money. It can easily be given to a friend or family member to invest.
I gotta give it to you man, the way your videos are edited has to be the best I’ve ever seen! I’m not even into law per se but these are always so fun to watch
"what's the matter boy?"
-woof-
"what!? timmy fell down the well?"
-woof-
"unauthorized entry of the well! bailiff, get him!"
lmao
The french revolution is starting to look like an enlightened response.
It started off well enough, but then Robespierre lost it. And then his own head.
Just FYI most who lost their heads were not the aristocracy but commoners who were deemed or were enemies of the revolution.
@@michaellewis1545 sooooo... those complicit in perpetuating the status quo? Look i get that things get a little hairy when we talk about the guillotines, and everyone already knows they were not used justly(ie who "deems"), but revolution attempts to weed out the old ways. This sentiment is comparable to the collateral killing of middle eastern families and general i-dont-give-a-shit-about-muslims "because the kids might grow up to become the next Osama." Whats interesting is i always hear that sentiment from conservatives, until its guillotine talk. Then suddenly its barbaric. Like... OK. They defend the rich like a reflex response. It's amazing. And sad.
I don't have a perfect answer. No one wants to really start a hot class war. But when our own elected reps are profiteering off our demise in collusion with corporations, what recourse is there? IDK. Wish i did. I don't think people honestly believe how bad this is gonna get in the coming months. 6.6 million unemployment already, and all the money is going to the top, yet again. How many more planned boom-bust cycles for fossil fuel survival will we take? Honestly i believe well be stuck with capitalism for a while, based on the lack of response now.
@@Flippwn1 the point I am trying to make is that most you get eaten by the Revolution are those who at the outset maybe revolutionary but are killed in the civil wars because they are not Revolutionary enough.
Dmf2pc wait some time, once this blows over the world will change, especially in America, where corporations have more rights than people
Just because someone doesn't make investment decisions or isn't informed about them until after they happen doesn't mean they didn't share confidential information with those who make those decisions for them. Serious effort to look into their communications should take place.
I imagine this "I wasn't the one who made the trade and I didn't find out about it until later" defense is standard operating procedure for obfuscating insider trading.
I'm pretty sure it's a foundational argument in money laundering.
Exactly. Why would all these extremely rich people want to get elected to office and take an enormous pay cut unless they were getting something out of it. especially when you see how greedy many of these Politicians are. There is no reason to take a job that pays barely 150k a year when you are making millions plus.
The person that did the trading for them clearly did so based on confidential information. There is no other rational explanation for such wild and extreme changes in an investment portfolio given what information was publicly available at the time.
People in power where absolute power can corrupt absolutely?
@@PyroX792 there is, by that time many investors were expecting stocks to go down based on public info, there was a lot of public info of how bad the virus was and how easily it could spread, it doesn't take a genius 2 and 2 together to know that travel and hotels would be hit hard once the problem got serious.
This has to be one of the best and most savage transitions into a Skillshare ad I’ve ever seen.
"if you're in a position to give" I have so much respect.
Old Chinese Proverb: "Don't tie your shoes in a watermelon patch." Translation: The willful appearance of stealing is in itself punishable.
But isn't watermen found in africa?
@@InvaderTak176 yes but they still traded back then. It reached India in the 7th century and was cultivated in China by the 10th.
...yeah but we have due process
@@samus4799
No, you dont. The fact that weinstein was convicted is proof of that.
“It’s rape even if there is no physical evidence.”
-Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr, regarding weinstein, praising this "move of the justice system into the 21st century".
@@samus4799
No, you dont. The fact that weinstein was convicted is proof of that.
“It’s rape even if there is no physical evidence.”
-Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr, regarding weinstein, praising this "move of the justice system into the 21st century".
Beyond the legal info you present here, you helped me realize the 'play on words' in the title of the Dan Aykroyd/Eddie Murphy movie Trading Places.
And that the heroes were also guilty of insider trading. They should have done a 'where are they now' segment in the closing credits where both characters became congressional representatives
I like your first idea best!
Let's roll some heads, comrade law man!!
Legal Eagle: Teaching what high school won’t, the literal law.
But by God can I tell you the fine details of dead civilizations.
I get that it's a joke, it's just not a good one.
LewBeats I mean you’re suppose to learn to critically think and take on stuff like this. Doing Law is an the application of your critical thinking skills.
almost all schools in my area (ontario, canada) offer law as an elective? idk if this is a joke but i took law bc it’s useful and maybe schools should be encouraging it more, but it’s not like the resource isn’t there
Dameon Pounders You’re going to have to know the fine details of previous cases.
Who ever thought the US was “the most prepared”.... seriously.
Trump?
😎 That's why the USA is now getting foreign aid... From RUSSIA!! Who'd have thought...
It would've been at least *prepared* had the current President took the virus seriously and didn't disband the pandemic response team years prior.
@@BigMamaDaveX Turns out it wasn't foreign aid, but a purchase.
Next we'll probably find out that they sent useless junk.
@@seigeengine
More likely people who listen to that compulsive liar.
1:45 - Chapter 1 - What is insider trading ?
4:10 - Chapter 2 - What about members of congress ?
14:40 - Chapter 3 - What are the defenses ?
19:35 - End roll ads
My jaw is dropping as you read the Speech and Debate Clause. I cannot imagine the interpretation you mention is remotely what was intended, rather it seems intended to enforce a deliberate and guaranteed platform for official business (as supported elsewhere in the Clause by preventing acting members from participation for any reason). Wild stuff!
As a North Carolinian, I can say that, yes, our state is great. We just don’t always produce the most... *ahem* ...“upstanding” politicians...
Most politicians have the potential for corruption. We have to keep checking them when we can.
I think you guys need better exports besides just basketball.
@@wanderlustwarrior That's Connecticut, that and taxes.
I think the nature of politics tends to attract people who have a higher likelihood of being corrupt already or getting corrupt after being elected. Considering the disregard for the law much of the administration has shown, this conduct doesn't surprise me. If anything, I suspect a lot more unlawful activity is going on and they just haven't been caught yet.
iiiiiiiiidk.....I've met a few people who were bonkers and from NC. Just sayin.
Bruh that thumbnail is amazing props to whoever made that!
Yeah I was surprised to know that they are allowed to invest at all, it seems like a major conflict of interest.
Great video! These real law analysis videos are my favorite part of your channel. It's been great to see it grow and gain so many followers and create so many new types of video!
It's pronounced "teh-vah" rather than "tea-vah" by the way -- it means "nature" in Hebrew.
I am amazed everyday that America hasn't had a revolution yet.
Kabir Kumar They’re still riding on the last one.
A revolution against whom? The government that controls the largest military in the history of the world, who have tanks, fighter jets, and NUKES at their disposal? Yeah I'm sure that'll work out well.
@@stevethepocket Funny thing, military arent allowed to be deployed against american citizens. The politicians are on their own.
@@kyosokutai Yeah, well, American citizens aren't "allowed" to take up arms and start attacking politicians either. I don't exactly expect the military to stand idly by and say "Sorry, rules are rules. Enjoy being dead."
Pocket Fluff Productions and this gets at the problem the founding fathers feared by implementing a constant-standing military. That the military would surpass the power of the people. We couldn’t fight our government if we wanted. This compromises our right given to us by the Declaration of Independence to overthrow our own government in order to build a new one. We’d lose. The military would crush the citizens. And that’s something the founding fathers couldn’t quite figure out how to avoid.
A note on the abstract shown at 5:10 - Devin/LeagleEagle says "beating the market by 12%", but while this is almost true, it is not shown by the highlighted clause ("a portfolio that mimics the sales of Senators lags the market by 12 basis points per month."). Instead, it is shown by the sentence that immediately follows this, namely: "The large difference in the returns of stocks bought and sold (nearly one percentage point per month) is economically large and reliably positive."
In particular, the abstract states that Senators go long to the tune of 85 basis points per month above market, and go short to the tune of 12 basis points of profit every month, compared to the market. This totals profits of 97 basis points above market per month. 1 basis point is defined as 0.01 percentage points, so the profits are 0.97 percentage points per month above market. However, despite the fact that 0.97×12=11.64, this doesn't equate to 11.64 percentage points per year, due to compounding and the figure being relative to the market's growth rate.
To see what this actually means, here's a concrete example: suppose that the stock market appreciated by 8.08% over the last 12 months when measured in dollars, with no volatility. This is equivalent to steady growth of 0.65% per month (since 0.65% per month compounds over 12 months to 8.08%; 1.0065¹² ≈ 1.0808). Since 0.65% + 0.97 percentage points = 1.62, this then means that the average Senator saw a return on their investments of 1.62% per month over the last 12 months when measured in dollars, which compounds to 21.27% per year (1.0162¹² ≈ 1.2127). The actual relative returns of a Senator's portfolio vs. the stock market in this example are then 121.27%/108.08% − 1 ≈ 12.20%. That is, if John holds a portfolio which mimics the market, and John and a Senator each put $1000 in their portfolios at the start of that 12-month period, then at the end of that period, John's portfolio is valued at $1080.80, whereas the Senator's portfolio is valued at $1212.70, which is 12.20% more than John's. The actual relative returns of John and the Senator's portfolios over a given period depends on the growth rate of the market over that period.
I was unable to read this comment due to not understanding it.
@@rbck8826 😂😂😂Same here.
I hope you’re holding up well amongst all this craziness counselor. I love the channel and appreciate all the hard work that is put into making such high quality videos. I also am wondering if you would be able to cover an episode of Perry Mason being that you are licensed to practice law in California where that takes place. I appreciate all you and your hard working staff so thanks again keep up the good work and stay healthy and safe.
7:09 That’s a beautiful acronym.
It’s like saying quit screen looking in split screen multiplayer or I’m telling mom.
When he said
This 👏 is👏 what 👏 happens👏 when 👏the 👏rulemakers 👏make 👏rules 👏for 👏themselves👏
I felt that.
Haha Supreme Court go brrrrrrr
"America's the most prepared"... LOL
to fail. There, now I made that sentence true.
Its like when you are prepared its useless if you decide to dont do anything.
Europe and China have higher death rates.
@@kenneth9452 Just you wait. That won't be the case for long.
@@kenneth9452 China has a population of 1.386 billion people. USA 340 million. However the USA has already 2,5x more infected and more deaths. China is under control. The number of cases in the USA is still growing at a fast rate. China has a death rate of 4% while the USA has a death rate of 34%.
Did you take every country in Europe and made the calculations for Europe as a whole?
That thumbnail tho, you are the man!
Very informational video as always, thank you!
thanks for helping me review for my CPA study.
>... time to get out the pitch forks and guillotines it might be time for some Senatorial heads to roll.
Nice to see UA-cam Red is back.
Regardless of if these count as insider trading, there seems to be enough evidence that they didn't do their due diligence to inform and protect the public.
There should be a law about that.
How very topical! I just had a lecture video on Rule 10b-5 yesterday!
I got a curiosity stream ad featuring you in the middle of your video and suffice to say, I was VERY confused
Objection: 7:58 "Irony" is a result in opposition to, and in mockery of, an expected outcome.
The fact that Richard Burr was opposed to the bill that should have stopped him from doing what he is now accused of is the opposite of Irony.
Objection to the objection: Morissette, Alanis. 1996. Ironic.
It's as ironic as rain on my your wedding spoon, your honor.
@@ChaplainTappman How on earth did you manage to type "spoon" instead of "day"?
@@stevethepocket to make it more 'ironic' ; )
"Apropos" is the term he wanted.
"Time to get my entrepreneur on!"
-Dianne Feinstein watching Skillshare
Senators get away with Insider Trading. I get shammed publicly for using an expired coupon.
Good on you for talking about things like this. Great to get information from someone who in fact knows the laws (yes, I'm not American but it's interesting stuff!) Thanks!
"On to the next criminal, I mean, senator"
This video is not getting enough coverage. This is a great breakdown and easy to understand.
Those crooks, I mean Senators, need to be held accountable.
As someone who was once a consultant, we used to have regular meetings that were purely for the purpose of helping us understand that selling stocks based on information not released to the public was something that would get you immediately fired. Your accounts were also monitored for potential violations. Google even sends out updates all the time to let everybody know when it's not okay to buy/sell stocks. It's befuddling that politicians were able to get away with this for so long, or that any of them think that it's okay. We are supposed to be able to trust them.
Thanks! i'll use this to my advantage
!
This is the type of video that needs to be getting made in these strange times we live in. Thank you.
thumbnail: *stonks*
me: clicks video
Fascinating video! I love how you cover legal matters from current events and pop culture! I've been following this channel since the anime video (Ace Attorney). This is kind of relevant to the current pandemic, but I'm writing a short story while social distancing. It's about a military court case concerning keeping a virus from spreading, but I'm struggling to write an accurate court scene. Could you do a review of JAG? It would really help me focus on what legal allegations would be highlighted for this fictional work. Keep making these amazing videos! And stay healthy!
You are doing great with thumbnails. Not too much meme, not too little.
I knew about the Coronavirus coming this way and sold my stocks about the same time.... I'm a speaker box designer... .I don't have insider information on anything but a Chevy Tahoe.
And how are Chevrolet stocks doing, huh? /s
11:21 IMHO Senator Burr here is saying, "No attorney will prosecute me." Who's going to go after him? Bill Barr? 😒
Got a strong Max Headroom vibe right there in the end. I totally approve :-)
"Onto the next criminal, I mean senator." you are the man.
Yay, he's doing my suggestion, thanks to everyone who gave it a 👍
The way you segue into your Skillshare ads is always so impressive.
So smooth and clever that I wonder if you learned how to segue by taking a Segue class on Skillshare.
Another well done video, sir. Thank you for what you do and how you go about doing it.
This. And I like how the things he advertises are usually relevant to the video, or relevant to people interested in other educational content. He respects and understands his audience, and uses that understanding to make place advertisements that don't just piss us off and make us want to skip them.
First and mostly : Thank you for this vidéo (and the others too).
Even from another country that has a Roman legal system, they are very interesting and useful to apprehend Common Law.
This problem is fairly common in western countries today, even when they have a hard legal regime on that matter (as in France), and the answer that you make is maybe the only way to subdue the problem.
In France, for example, we have two different judicial mechanism to counteract this problem, one called "Conflit d'Intérêt" (meaning "opposition of obligation") that forbid to have personal interest that contradict your social legal obligations, and the other is "Délit d'initié" (meaning exactly "insider trading"..., and this mechanism is nearly 80 years old in France) that forbid someone at a power level to use the knowledge own by this position to get personal interest from it. And none of those two mechanism are solving the problem : elected Representative and Government Official continue to make abuse with their money and assets, when they are in power => we had three cases just recently in the Government, in Health Ministry, just about Coronavirus too... and Courts will have the same problem that you tell about those USA's cases, they will not be able to condemn strongly.
So, you are right, the only way to solve those sort of issues is to oblige them to have only assets in blind trust. Or maybe to block their assets for the time of their term.
thank you for making a video about this
Downside to virus: Too many to count
Upside to virus: LE making loads of videos and I have time to watch them.
Everyone who invested in bitcoin after the crash made their 150%
To me, it was obvious, free money. Not sure if everyone else saw it that way or not tho...
This is what happens when rulemakers make rules about themselves. Love it!
The thumbnail, you nailed it legal eagle.
I like that this subject is important to you, I was brought up on rational accountability, and have been called a bit of a policy wonk, in these unsettled times, believe it or not, thorough examination gives me a sense of home and measure of emotional security.
One man's insider trading is another man's... wait, WTF?! Lock 'em up!
Have fun getting your salad tossed in prison
Yep. You or I would already be in jail for the same thing.
How hard is it? If you’re in Congress, you can’t buy or sell stocks!
We should pass a law explicitly stating this. Let's talk to the legislators who write the laws!
Oh, right. They're the same people doing this. Never mind.
Indeed. It isn't simply insider trading based on the definitions, using private or secret information. But they have the ability to manipulate the market. Suppose for example legislators buy stock in solar panel companies, then pass a law throwing billions of dollars at the industry. Is it illegal to buy Boeing and then bail them out? Well, if it's discussed openly on C-Span it's not a secret.
@@EF-69 honestly I'm surprised that it's not already a law. They have so much power to change things so that they can make more money. But like it was said above, it's unlikely they would make that law... because it would limit them.
Man your suit and tie is mighty sharp today! Dang. Jealous!
Point of information! At 5:09 the highlighted: 12 basis points means 0.12%, (for sell-side) and similarly the sentence before the highlighted one 85 basis points for buy-side. Although that number is per month rather than per year, so when it compounded up for yearly returns and assuming matching trade on the other side it could amount to that 12% better than market you said, but that is not what the study has studied (depends on the length of time holding individual stocks).