Replies

I was listening to this exchange yesterday, and what I heard was Rush playing the class-envy card (used about as often as Jesse Jackson's race card).

The caller was absolutely correct. A stockbroker knows that insider trading is a violation of rule number one. And if she didn't know it was wrong, why did she lie to cover it up?

Unfortunately, the caller made the fatal decision to attempt to establish his conservative credentials (probably knowing this would be the first line of attack when Rush decided to slam him). A few seconds later, when Rush heard that the caller was going to actually disagree with him, it was all over. Forget the fact that the caller was right. Cut him off and go on the offensive.

Rush is generally right on the issues, but when he is wrong or when someone disagrees with him, he attacks. I, for one, get tired of his boorish behavior. That is why I have pretty much quit listening to him.

The caller was absolutely correct. A stockbroker knows that insider trading is a violation of rule number one. And if she didn't know it was wrong, why did she lie to cover it up?

Martha Stewart wasn't an insider at ImClone. She did not have inside information at ImClone. This is why she was not charged with insider trading.

Now, the SEC is going after her in civil court on insider trading - but wait until you hear their theory on the case. Stewart knew that Waksal was selling shares, because her broker told her. That is market information - not insider information. It is legal to trade on market information. However, the SEC contends that, on hearing Waksal was selling, Stewart inferred that the FDA was rejecting the application on Erbitux - which is insider information. So, under this theory, if you guess at insider information, you are guilty of insider trading.

As to why she lied to cover it up... I certainly have no particular insight, but I'd theorize she figured the feds were out to get her and make her an example. So she wanted to make sure they didn't get anything. The mere fact that she hadn't necessarily done anything illegal is far from a refuge.

And, of course, it's very hard to be sure she really did lie during those interviews, as we have only sketchy notes and agent recollections to go by. If lying during an investigation is illegal, I wish the investigators were required to record those conversations.

Drew Garrett

I understand your point....please don't give up on Rushbo....if you count the numbers of times he HAS been right versus the wrong times his track record is LIGHT YEARS ahead of the media out there....take this from one who knows -- I've been listening to Rush for over 15 years now....and have learned to take some of the things he says (when he's wrong -- which isn't that often) with a grain of salt...

The caller was absolutely correct. A stockbroker knows that insider trading is a violation of rule number one. And if she didn't know it was wrong, why did she lie to cover it up?

Probably because the federal government was on a massive hunt for scapegoats to blame the economy on during the 2002 midterm elections. It could be that Martha wanted to avoid the appearance of wrong doing, rather than trying to cover up a crime. Receiving a tip from a broker is a rumor, not insider information.

Martha got prosecuted and convicted because she's a rich bitch and the federal government has millions of our dollars to put on a show trial.