There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock… Harken’s SEC filings make it clear that the company’s directors knew radical steps were necessary.
So if the company’s dire financial situation was so obvious (and public via the SEC filings), Bush was right to sell.
The fact that the information was public makes the charge of “insider trading” asinine. To prove that, you need to have some evidence that Bush acted on priviledged information, not public knowledge.
Depends on the Dates of the information, doesn't it?