←back to thread

Insider trade on Splunk acquisition?

(twitter.com)
417 points mkmk | 3 comments | 21 Sep 23 15:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.23s | source
Show context
scarmig ◴[21 Sep 23 16:51 UTC] No.37600401[source]▶
Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $10M.
replies(3): >>37600415 #>>37600568 #>>37600880 #
1. rs999gti ◴[21 Sep 23 17:23 UTC] No.37600880[source]▶
Unless they are a politician :/

https://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459

replies(2): >>37601938 #>>37601979 #
2. ◴[21 Sep 23 18:32 UTC] No.37601938[source]▶
3. kasey_junk ◴[21 Sep 23 18:34 UTC] No.37601979[source]▶
You’ll note that opinion piece never actually outlines any special immunity from insider trading rules that Congress people have. What it’s really outlining is that the normal rules for insider trading aren’t enough for Congress people. Which is a reasonable position to take, but it’s not what the headline implies.

There is no special immunity for insider trading for Congress. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20170412_RS21127_36174d...