Because this hypothetical memo was paid for by our tax dollars, not your own private money! That means it belongs to the American people, not individuals for their private gain. Using it for your own gain would be theft from the American public.

In this hypothetical case, of course. There is no evidence that such a memo exists. But if it did...

▲

jMyles a day ago | parent | next [-]

> That means it belongs to the American people, not individuals for their private gain.

This is a strong case that there ought not to be any such thing as a secret opinion or confidential advice from the White House OLC - and I agree with that opinion if that's what you're saying.

But it doesn't transform the information contained therein to nonpublic.

I'm not saying this whole thing wasn't a total scumbag move - it was - but it's not quite the same crime as insider trading.

	▲	hvb2 a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> But it doesn't transform the information contained therein to nonpublic. The legal opinion itself was non public? If they couldn't use that they would first have to put up the money to pay the legal fees to find out how likely their bet was to pay off. And just to put this in writing too, I would be shocked if we don't find out later that a lot of the volatility was a way for a few people to make a lot of money. You can make a lot of money when there's more volatility. So all the flip flopping on tariffs yes/no might very well be manipulating markets...
	▲	hnfong a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Not saying you're wrong, but note that in general attorney-client privilege is kind of important as well.

▲

airstrike a day ago | parent | prev [-]

A travesty, to be sure, but not insider trading.