← Back to context

Comment by JumpCrisscross

9 hours ago

> sycophants in DC

Who? Because if you have evidence of military secrets being leaked through prediction markets, we actually need that journalistic record maintained.

13 comments

JumpCrisscross

Reply
remus  8 hours ago

I don't think the parent mentioned military secrets in particular? But the insider trading is already well documented e.g. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cge0grppe3po

  • JumpCrisscross  8 hours ago

    > the insider trading

    The suspect hasn't been charged with insider trading. (OP said those "in DC seem to be able to do everything listed.")

itake  8 hours ago

I don't know who, but there are a lot of news articles about high volume oil trading activities shortly before publicly military action.

foo12bar  7 hours ago

There's plenty of evidence of it happening, if you consider the odds of surges of pre-market trading of oil futures 20 minutes before Trump tweets on Iran happening coincidentally. The actual finding of who's who has to be done by the U.S. law enforcement, who aren't really interested.

  • JumpCrisscross  6 hours ago

    > plenty of evidence of it happening

    There is circumstantial evidence. We need to collate that. But nothing trumps direct evidence. If someone has that I will bend over backwards to find a way to securely connect them with, at the very least, a reporter who can document it so it shows up in an internet search when an empowered staffer starts down this path.

    • pixl97  37 minutes ago

      The problem with this administration is that what you're saying will eventually happen. It will come out they were trading on this. And not a damned thing will happen.