Can a Grand Jury be convened to consider indictment the four Senators who dumped stock?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

Or does the Senate have to investigate first?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Criminal investigations and Senate investigations are totally separate.

If the U.S. Attorney for whichever district has jurisdiction thinks there's a case they can convene a grand jury no matter what the Senate does (but remember who's in charge of the DoJ). The Senate can investigate regardless of what the criminal justice system does - and the only thing the Senate could do is censure or expel the miscreant. It's not a criminal matter for them.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

2. 1) Thanks. 2) I posted in the wrong effing forum.

Being indoors is killing my brain.

[McCamy Taylor]

3. Barr and Mitch will not touch this. Civil suit is an option.

Those who bought the dumped stocks should lawyer up and file civil suits. That will lead to a discovery phase and then when the entire federal government changes to Democratic next year, the prosecutors' job will be easier.

[former9thward]

14. Your post is inaccurate in every sentence.

The stock market does not work the way you think it works. Billions of shares of stocks are traded everyday. Tens or hundreds of millions of a single stock may be trade in one day. When you buy stock you have no idea who it once belonged to. And no one else does either. When you buy stock you buy for your own reasons. Why someone else sold it is not one of the reasons.

Senators hold their stock holdings in trusts they do not control. They don't personally buy or sell stocks. Insider trading applies when you get information from a company insider -- not from other sources. Whatever happened here was not criminal.

[relayerbob]

4. The worst part is if they did, 45 will pardon tham

Sadly, the best think is to wait until Jan 20, then let the boom come down

[Demsrule86]

5. Nice try but Feinstein did not such thing...so knock it off...that would three GOP Senators...

I am so tired of those who attack Democratic Senators...giving the GOP their what 'aboutism' talking points.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

7. The timing is suspect. I'll grant Burr and Loeffler have more damning evidence

Other senators including Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) are also facing questions about the timing to their own stock dumps. Both say they weren’t personally involved in the investment decisions

WaPo

In both the cases of Inhofe (a wingnut, but one for whom Al Franken has had kind words - or at least funny words) and Feinstein (long time Senator and successor to Mayor Moscone): it could be true, but the timing is really bad optics, and I don't believe either party has the monopoly on ethics. I'd sure as Hell investigate all four and let the facts come out.

[Hav]

15. That's a bs argument. The timing can always be suspect

If an activity happens often enough, it's easy to precede another event by weeks or months. That's why this cannot be evidence alone. There are other factors that should be taken into account, for instance, as far as I've read, Feinstein wasn't in the briefings about corona that Burr was in. Feinstein's stocks were also handled through a blind trust which typically means she has neither control on when stocks are sold nor does she even know about the details of her investment.
Further, her stocks were related to biotech and in contrast to some Rep Senators, I didn't read anything about her selling stocks that would be hit hard (hotel business) or a reinvestment into areas that could "benefit" from such a crisis. That cannot be said about some of the Repubs

Just making an argument based on timing alone is lazy when so much more info is available. But it's interesting that a couple of BS supporters are so invested into going after Feinstein.

[nsd]

16. +1

[Demsrule86]

17. The market was declining...her husband sold stock and I say this post smears Dianne Feinstein...

and you need to stop. Why is it in our best interest to give the GOP talking points to get the GOP shitheads out of trouble? And Democrats don't get the same briefings that the GOP do... your post is full of innuendo and is offensive to me as a Democrat. Bad optics... ...you think that is sufficient to smear an outstanding Senator? I don't. This is shameful.

[Aquaria]

12. More importantly

The company Feinstein sold stock in wasn't a company associated with COVID-19 in the least. They do research into a very specific cancer cell, and nothing else.

The company had nothing at all to do with COVID-19, so it's a rather ridiculous argument to make that her husband or trust or whoever sold that stock based on what she heard in that meeting.

If it were a virology clinic, sure. But a cancer researcher? That's like getting mad at her for selling stock in a prosthetic limb company.

Not all biotech companies are the same, or even closely related. It's a huge field, now, with thousands of manifestations.

[tirebiter]

6. Each case is unique whatever happened there is no discussion of conspiracy.

[Hortensis]

8. Keeping this in the news while people die would not be good for them. nt

[question everything]

9. The irony is that we want elected officials to put their holdings in a blind trust

And when the trust sells stocks we are upset. At least ,Feinstein said that here was.

Oh, Teump, of course, did not.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

10. Again, its the timing

It calls into question how blind the trust is.

If the facts bear out one thing had nothing to do with the other, then I'm good.

Your DU handle is "Question Everything." I think that is a reasonable point of view. My handle is Algernon Moncrieff - an Oscar Wilde character who said "The truth is rarely pure and never simple." I very sincerely believe that.

[Aquaria]

13. It does no such thing

When the people sell stocks unrelated to the very thing you're accusing them of getting inside information to profit from.

Feinstein's sale had nothing to do with COVID-19, so why drag her into this?

People sell stocks, all the time, in big amounts, at that. It's not always for nefarious reasons. It's simply what people who own stocks do--buy and sell to make money, or prevent losing money.

Nefarious reasons like insider trading to get ahead of a big loss or to make a big profit do happen, but it's not true of every transaction. Go after the ones who look hinky, by all means. But selling during a volatile market in an unrelated field is not one of those things.

[Turin_C3PO]

18. What Burr

and that other Repub congress guy did looks very suspicious. I’m not a lawyer and don’t know the legality of the matter, but it sure looks bad.

[Demsrule86]

19. Well I don't consider this post to have anything to do with facts or even 'truth'

You are slandering an honorable Democratic Senator who was not briefed with the other three. You have no facts..just an opinion 'the timing is suspect'. This is completely meaningless. It is a smear...and only hurts our side. why would you do that?

[Demsrule86]

20. It just seems to me that Sanders attacks the party on a regular basis...and so do some of his

supporters...not saying this is what you are doing purposefully but it has the same effect...discourages people from voting Democrat or even voting at all with the 'they all do it bullshit'. Every reporter on TV except no doubt for Fox has said that Feinstien was not involved in insider trading. She had not even been briefed when Burr and the others were;Trump refuses to brief Democrats...so please delete.

[Aquaria]

11. The power to call a grand jury would come from a US Attorney

They work for the DOJ. Do you see Bill Barr letting that fly?

I don't.