It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The buying or selling of a security by someone who has access to material, nonpublic information about the security.
it is illegal when the material information is still nonpublic--trading while having special knowledge is unfair to other investors who don't have access to such knowledge.
Originally posted by RealSpoke
It should probably come as no surprise to anyone that someone like Paul Ryan would trade on inside information gained through his position as a congressman to line his pockets, but this particular instance is especially egregious. Ryan attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on September 18, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to disclose the coming economic meltdown and beg Congress to pass legislation to help collapsing banks.
Instead of doing anything to help, Ryan left the meeting and on that very same day Paul Ryan sold shares of stock he owned in several troubled banks and reinvested the proceeds in Goldman Sachs, a bank that the meeting had disclosed was not in trouble. This is the guy Republicans want one heartbeat away from the presidency? He seems more than a little shady to me.
Have a look at Ryan's financial disclosure form for 2008--you can click on each page to enlarge them. The "Transactions" section begins on page 12--scroll through and look at all the trades Paul Ryan made on "9-18-08":
www.the-richmonder.com...
www.opensecrets.org...
TLDR Version;
On September 18, 2008, Ryan attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and was urged to craft legislation to help financially troubled banks. That same day Ryan sold shares in various troubled banks and invested in Goldman Sachs
And people wonder why congress is full of millionaires? Ryan is just more establishment slime just waiting to screw over the rest of America.edit on Mon Aug 13 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: to use source title
Originally posted by charles1952
Well, maybe, but you don't have a very strong case yet. CNN was reporting in August that there were 90 troubled banks on the list. And that number was up from previous announcements. Everybody knew that the banks were in trouble. Selling off those banks would have been a prudent move for any American. money.cnn.com...
Originally posted by RealSpoke
If this isn't insider trading, what do you think insider trading is? Martha Stewart went to jail for selling stock off of inside info.
The buying or selling of a security by someone who has access to material, nonpublic information about the security.
it is illegal when the material information is still nonpublic--trading while having special knowledge is unfair to other investors who don't have access to such knowledge.
www.investopedia.com...edit on 13-8-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
Let me apologize. I originally had a too-credulous item here linking to a piece at The Richmonder alleging that Paul Ryan has sold bank shares after a closed door meeting with Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke on the financial crisis in 2008. As Eric Platt explains he certainly seems to have sold the shares on the same day as the meeting, but the meeting happened in the evening by which time the markets would have been closed. One can perhaps construct a scenario by which the Richmonder's theory of the case holds up, but they don't have the goods and I shouldn't have passed their analysis on with no qualification and so little scrutiny of my own.
As Brad DeLong writes, for one reason or another Ryan did quite a lot of trading of individual bank stocks in 2008 so the timing of this particularly transaction isn't particularly noteworthy when put in that context.
No doubt you remember earlier this year when President Obama signed the Stock Act to end the exemption of House and Senate members from insider trading laws. Many of us were astonished and angered to learn the exemption existed in the first place.
Robert Walker, a Washington ethics attorney and former chief counsel for both the House and Senate ethics committees, explained that Senate bill did include a provision that covered spouses and children, but when Cantor's office wrote the House version, this language was shifted to a different section of the bill. The change meant that spouses and dependent children weren't subject to the new reporting requirements.
"The House recrafted some of the provisions of it and moved some of the provisions around. In that process, some of the Senate bill that applied to filing of these new reports that was moved from one section of the bill to the other," Walker said.
Initially when contacted by CNN, Cantor's office insisted it did nothing to change the intent of the STOCK Act. But when pressed with the new information uncovered by CNN, the majority leader's office conceded it made changes to the House bill that effectively took out the requirement for spouses and children to file these reports.
As has been pointed out, these deals were made before the meeting began. The whole country had seen reports, and even Bernanke's speeches, to the effect that the banks were in trouble. I'd be more worried about Ryan if he hadn't gotten out of those banks.
He made trades that very day selling stocks from the banks going belly up, and buying stock in a bank that was set to clean up on the action (Goldman Sachs).
UPDATE: Ryan's staff has responded and TPM accepts their explanation and calls this story "debunked."
Brad DeLong weighs in on this so-called "debunking." Did Ryan's flacks lie to Benjy Sarlin of TPM? Why would they lie if they have nothing to hide?
There is no way in hell--if you are rebalancing to try to track the Russell 1000 index--you make only 58 trades in a year, that you make 27 of those 58 in large money-center banks, and that 10 of those trades involve shifting your money from Citi to Goldman and back five times.
No way in hell.
I don't know what was going on. But it appears that Ryan's flacks are--for some reason--simply making s@#& up.
It is very obvious what was going on. This was tax-loss harvesting, designed to avoid the 30 day wash sale rule. All the sales came 30 days or more after purchases and everytime something was sold, a correlated asset was bought. Rebalancing the index??? That is hilarious.
If the trades don't make sense -- and financially they don't -- there's probably something else going on. Leaks of committee info?
He always bought high and sold low. It's part of what makes the insider-trading charge absurd. No one's that unlucky; Ryan was deliberately registering losses on these sales. That seems strange. But if you're trying to stay in a sector to catch an eventual rebound, and want to maximize your losses for future taxes, it makes a fair degree of sense. And sure enough, once 2009 rolls around and the markets achieve a degree of stability, the strange sales suddenly stop.
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Of course Ryan used information from these meetings with the Big Banks to make trades. Too bad the STOCK Act, which would have stopped this practice, was GUTTED by one of Ryan's cronies in Congress; See: Eric Cantor's office has thwarted the Stock Act disclosure rules
No doubt you remember earlier this year when President Obama signed the Stock Act to end the exemption of House and Senate members from insider trading laws. Many of us were astonished and angered to learn the exemption existed in the first place.
Cantor, like a sleaze, waited until AFTER the senate had passed the STOCK Act, but before the house would vote, he re-wrote a part of the Act that exempted spouses and families to allow them to continue with - you guessed it - insider trading with privy-Congressional intel.
Robert Walker, a Washington ethics attorney and former chief counsel for both the House and Senate ethics committees, explained that Senate bill did include a provision that covered spouses and children, but when Cantor's office wrote the House version, this language was shifted to a different section of the bill. The change meant that spouses and dependent children weren't subject to the new reporting requirements.
"The House recrafted some of the provisions of it and moved some of the provisions around. In that process, some of the Senate bill that applied to filing of these new reports that was moved from one section of the bill to the other," Walker said.
Initially when contacted by CNN, Cantor's office insisted it did nothing to change the intent of the STOCK Act. But when pressed with the new information uncovered by CNN, the majority leader's office conceded it made changes to the House bill that effectively took out the requirement for spouses and children to file these reports.
Now, to the naysayers trying to defend Ryan for his trades, he clearly had very juicy information that the public did not have courtesy of his meeting with the heads of these banks and the Treasury sec. He made trades that very day selling stocks from the banks going belly up, and buying stock in a bank that was set to clean up on the action (Goldman Sachs). Just because he had other trades mixed in a few months apart from those dates does not indicate these were "routine" trades. To any court, this would be a clear example of INSIDER TRADING. If you or I had done this, we'd be looking at real jail time.
But Paul Ryan, like Eric Cantor, is above the law. Insider trading does not apply to them. Even when they sit in on a meeting between banks and the Treasury Dept. that will determine the fate of certain banks, Congress members like them can trade stocks in those companies using that information.
S+F OP, this is a big deal, but as it happens to be regarding a Tea Party darling, no one will care, and Congress will continue to flaunt the law.