this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
216 points (99.1% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7327 readers
212 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Soup@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Judges having a vested interest in their stocks doing well is totally not a conflict of interest nope.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

you won't be able to find a judge wo a conflict of interest.

most middle class americans have things like their retirement accounts linked as well; so you wouldn't be able to find anyone without some sort of conflict like this.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 21 points 3 days ago

You could find someone whose conflict of interest is a little less intense though. It would be a step in the right direction. This just seems like a deliberate taunt.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Okay, now take this further:

If our judges all have conflicts of interest then our judicial system is unjust.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

As if there could be any doubt. Lol

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The people in "power" hire other companies to manage their stocks, it should be the same for all these judges.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Do they? I've never seen a company linked to any of the sketchy stock trading that gets reported like with Pelosi. I think you should be allowed to do things like bonds, but ANY stocks should be sold off before taking any office. Having any stock in any sector is the same as having a business in the sector (stocks is part owning), it should all be illegal. The very act of having stocks means your mindset is going to want a "positive" impact on the stock market, not the economic reality of an average citizen (their constituents who voted them to represent them and not the politicians interests).

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I'm pretty sure she has a company do that for her. It doesn't stop the collusion, even if they were banned. I read somewhere most of the insider trading happens on the lower levels of companies and banks, because executives and other people are very closely monitored as well as their family.

Some have to divest completely like government officials, some have to make their trades public, but I don't think that applies to lawyers/judges, and definitely not everyone that in theory has insider information. You can go find and copy the portfolio of most powerful people.

I think government /executives shouldnt be allowed at all even through a company other than savings/retirement, judges and other position of influence (banks) should divest, and stocks should be left to the people. That's never going to happen

[–] MsPenguinette@lemmy.world 46 points 3 days ago

The judge’s ties to the healthcare business are a stark reminder of how pervasive the for-profit industry is in American life — a point made by Mangione himself

🤌

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

The house always wins.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

Revolution remains the only way for change. The legal system won't help us.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 5 points 3 days ago

So? It's not like she took MILLIONS in Bribes from the Prosecutors. I mean I mean her Daughter donated $20 to Biden! THAT would be a CRIME!