THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bill who wrote (17757)	7/18/2002 12:42:18 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) of 21057

Your proof is the timing. Heck, if he'd waited a year, he could have doubled his money. It's pathetically obvious that your theory on the timing is ridiculous. What are you talking about? The stock price movement is utterly irrelevant. Nobody's saying the man is prescient. Hell, he barely seems sentient. Repeat this to yourself, three times: when a connected insider sells stock just before a negative announcement is made, privileged information has been acted upon. That's the way it works in the real world, whether or not the person leaves evidence behind. It doesn't get different just because a politician is involved. It's not obvious enough to SEC investigators who researched the matter and attained thousands of pages of documents. They cleared him. How many times does this have to be repeated? All this means is that the evidence was insufficient to prosecute. That's according to the legal standard. The rest of us don't have to be that rigorous; if we see bird poop on the windshield we can assume that there's been a bird in the vicinity.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next