Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, May 14, 2020

Federal agents seized a cellphone belonging to a prominent Republican senator on Wednesday night as part of the Justice Department's investigation into controversial stock trades he made as the novel coronavirus first struck the U.S., a law enforcement official said.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is punishment for letting the Senate IC Russia report out.

#1 | Posted by bored at 2020-05-14 02:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#1 Bingo. Burr has angered dear leader and it can't just line him up in front of a AA cannon like his NK boy toy does.

This criminal president will now use the DOJ as a tool to punish political enemies with no fear of being held accountable from the ball-less senate.

#2 | Posted by Nixon at 2020-05-14 06:59 AM | Reply

When the Burr trades story first came out weren't we all on the side of him being investigated? So now Trump is doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, which is pretty much the most we can expect from him. This is the wrong story for Democrats to get up on their hind legs to start yapping over because it makes our ethics look situational to centrist Republicans who we are hoping to convince to vote for Biden in November.

#3 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-05-14 08:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"This is the wrong story for Democrats to get up on their hind legs to start yapping over because it makes our ethics look situational to centrist Republicans who we are hoping to convince to vote for Biden in November."

I totally agree, fry this -------.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2020-05-14 09:11 AM | Reply

But what about the trades made by Loeffler?
Is she being investigated?

#5 | Posted by bored at 2020-05-14 09:17 AM | Reply

"But what about the trades made by Loeffler? Is she being investigated?"

Like I said, this is the type of reasoning that makes our ethics look situational.

#6 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-05-14 09:26 AM | Reply

But we can certainly call for her to be investigated as well but I doubt Democrats will do that because it opens up a huge can of worms that threatens to expose business as usual in DC and are hoping that certain stories stay dead.

#7 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-05-14 09:30 AM | Reply

Diane Feinstein confirmed that the FBI had spoken to her about her husband's stock transactions within the same timeframe as Burr's and Loeffler's.

But one, she had nothing to do with her husband's sales - government rules requires members to report both their's and their spouse's activity even if the other has no interest in them. And two, her husband sold stock at a loss in a company involved in cancer research - which was wholly unconnected to coronavirus.

#8 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-05-14 04:55 PM | Reply

Abuse of power by a Senator for personal financial gain? Let me guess, - it's a Republican. Statistically, pretty much always a Republican. And even more so when the allegation involves sexual misconduct.

#9 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-14 05:04 PM | Reply

Senators should not be allowed to own stocks.

If you want to be the President Or a member of Congress you should be REQUIRED to place your finances in a blind trust.

It should be obvious.

But don't hold your breadth.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-05-14 05:09 PM | Reply

TR: I have no illusions about Senator Feinstein. She is as slick an financially corrupt as almost any Republican. IMO, she represents the worst of the worst in the Democratic Party.

#11 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-14 05:10 PM | Reply

Oops...

Senators should not be allowed to directly own stocks.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-05-14 05:15 PM | Reply

#11

I have no illusions about Sen. Feinstein. She should have retired years ago.

However, I'm sick and tired of her being lumped in with Burr and Loeffler over profiteering from CV. It just plays into the false equivalence game.

There is no there there.

#13 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-05-14 05:25 PM | Reply

TR: In the case of Dianne Feinstein I am not persuaded that it is a 'false equivalence'.

#14 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-14 05:40 PM | Reply

M8,

As it relates to this individual case, it is. The company her husband sold out of was not affected by coronavirus. And he sold almost at their trading low point. They develop cancer drugs.

According to the link, after his sale, the stock actually rose and according to analysts is on target for an almost 100% rise from his sale price.

#15 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-05-14 05:49 PM | Reply

When I have argued to a jury, I have never found it persuasive to be stuck in the position of acknowledging that my client may have been a slimeball on all those 'other' occasions, but not on this specific particular occasion. That's the problem with having a prior record. You lose the benefit of the doubt in the minds of most people.

#16 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-14 06:09 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort