So... Mark Cuban says,The Fed's collateral ``absolutely should be made public,'', starts a website

[HCE SuiGeneris]

called http://bailoutsleuth.com/ and all-of-a-sudden he is being investigated by the SEC for insider trading in 2004.

Anyone else smell something funny here? If you ask me, the crooks in this maladministration are exacting revenge for speaking out publicly. Isn't it great to know that government will attempt to destroy you if you call out for transparency.


Article on Cuban and his website (near bottom): http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aOngFPgq7r3M

[nichomachus]

1. You take on the corporatocracy at your own peril

Ask Eliot Spitzer
Ask John Edwards

[HCE SuiGeneris]

2. or Sibel Edmonds, or Valerie Plame, or

Paul Sanford, or Paul Wellstone...

[Octafish]

32. or Danny Casolaro, or Steve Kangas, or Jim Hatfield, or Cliff Baxter, or

Mark Lombardi.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

34. or how Scott Ritter is 1st called nuts then charged w/abusing a minor.

n/t

[Octafish]

36. or Don Siegelman is called a crook and jailed after three trials for same bogus charge.

Kerry is my President, too, my Friend.

[Mr Rabble]

35. Those are great diagrams. nt

[Octafish]

38. Social Network Diagrams that beautifully map Treason, Warmongering and all manner of Criminality.

"Narrative Structures," he called them.



Mark Lombardi

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. If He Did It, He Did It.

Are you saying he didn't?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

5. You have a problem with comprehension.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. I Comprehended It Just Fine. You Didn't Answer The Question.

Are you saying he didn't do it? Because if he did do it, then it's illegal. If he did do it, then I really don't give a rat's ass about how or why it came to light that he did it. Maybe it was revenge, maybe that's a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. But who cares? If he's guilty he's guilty. That's what's relevant.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

12. The' who cares' part you are referring to...

I care. It's sad that you don't.

[TexasObserver]

17. All you have is a civil complaint from an angry Bush administration, and you're believing it?

What is your logical basis for that? Do you routinely believe anything the Bush admin tells you about the targets it picks for retribution?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

24. Are You Saying He Didn't Do It?

If that's what you're saying, just say so. If you don't believe he did it, is there any evidence or questioning of evidence that can be presented to bolster your case? Is there a question as to whether he did or didn't sell his stock the night before, or that the meeting took place or not? Are any of the details in question?

If he isn't guilty, that obviously should come out in court. Personally, I have no idea if he is or isn't, but based on the information so far it appears the charges may have merit.

[TexasObserver]

26. i'M sayinG therE iS nO reasoN tO believE hE diD iT.

You're what we call a good juror for the prosecution, because you believe the defendant is guilty without knowing any evidence.

Why are you so gullible when it comes to political hatchet jobs by the Bush administration?


BTW, did you notice how stupid it looks to capitalize the same letter in every word?

[Shardik]

28. "If he isn't guilty, that obviously should come out in court."

You have a lot more faith in our justice system than I do.

[taterguy]

4. He might be guilty but it reeks of selective enforcement

[dysfunctional press]

6. how so?

:shrug:

[crazylikafox]

10. Ask Martha Stewart. Maybe she can bake him a cake with a file in it.

[dysfunctional press]

14. i'd prefer to ask the person that posted it...

they must have some reason for believing it.

[taterguy]

13. There's plenty of people the SEC's limited investigative staff could be looking into

They choose one of the most public critics of the SEC.

Similar to how the government chose to prosecute people for drug violations during the Vietnam War based on how outspoken they were.

[dysfunctional press]

15. how do you know who all they're investigating?

my neighbor got tapped by the sec and had to testify in an insider trading case because of a stock tip his business partner gave him after a conversation he had with someone on a plane trip.

and nobody involved is a public critic of the sec.

[taterguy]

20. None of us will ever know for sure

But the undeniable fact is that our government has a history of targeting people for criminal investigations based on unrelated political things the targets say or do. (See the Church Committee Report on Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans)

I happen to think this is one of those instances. It's an old case involving a relatively small amount of money.

Cuban is someone that's been very critical of the government. See this excerpt from his blog:

And I want 1 more thing. I want transparency. The way the government publishes information on money it spends ,receives and owes is a joke. No one in this country has any real knowledge of how much our country really owes. There are so many hidden and unpublished liabilities that if our country were a public company, someone would go to jail.

http://blogmaverick.com/2007/12/11/warren-buffett-taxes-and-the-presidency/

Ordinarily I'm not a conspiracy minded sort but this doesn't pass the smell test.

[dysfunctional press]

21. they may also choose which cases to prosecute based on probability of success...

cuban's case sounds like a slam dunk.

[taterguy]

23. John Sinclair's case was a slam dunk

That doesn't mean that prosecuting him was the right thing to do.

[dysfunctional press]

29. i'm not familiar with the case- what did the sec get him on?

:shrug:

[taterguy]

40. If you're that ignorant about history then there's really no point in continuing this conversation

Step away from the computer and read a book.

Or not.

[dysfunctional press]

41. the only 'john sinclair' of any note on wikipedia was some drug bust from the 60's...

surely that's not the case you're trying to compare to the sec bringing charges against mark cuban 40 years later, is it?

because that would be completely morAnic.

[LSK]

18. Bush has 2 more months to go????

You don't really think Quakers and Ted Kennedy are terrorists do you???

Been paying attention for the past 8 years???

Why use a name QuestionAll if you Question Nothing?

[dysfunctional press]

22. quakers and ted kennedy..??

:shrug: you lost me there...i was replying to a thread about mark cuban and the sec.

[TexasObserver]

19. Absolutely. Anyone who doesn't see that is blind.

Mark Cuban has spoken out on other topics that make him a target for the Bushies, too.

It's clearly selective enforcement, and the kind of matter that is rarely filed as a case before negotitations with the target ensue. In fact, it's unheard of.

[sarcasmo]

25. The same thing as when Homeland Security went after Tommy Chong.

Selective Enforcement.

[TexasObserver]

27. Tommy Chong, Martha Stewart, Lil Kim - Bush got 'em!! Osama? not so much

[dkofos]

7. I was wondering who he pissed off. I guess this is the reason.

[bigbrother05]

9. Thought it was Dancing with the Stars that po'd everyone

:rofl:

[librechik]

11. No. Nothing unusual at all. If you look closely, only Democrats can be prosecuted

for white collar crime.

Nothing funny whatsoever. When they went after the Qwest CEO a few days after he had refused to hand over customer records, there was nothing weird about that, either.

You are just paranoid.


:sarcasm:

[MilesColtrane]

42. Mark Cuban wanted Michael Bloomberg to be the next president.

From his blog...

It also scares me that despite claims of not being an “insider” or wanting a different vision for America, every remaining candidate spends more energy campaigning to their party than to the issues. I got sick watching Clinton and Barack argue about who was less of a “Reaganite” during one of their few lively debate exchanges.

-snip-

So here is my hope. My hope is that the entire primary process is just the preseason. That its nothing more than an expensive introduction to the Republican and Democratic candidates and once they have picked their winner, a wealthy individual will nominate them self to compete with the 2 parties and run for President.

Are you listening Mayor Bloomberg ? For less than the cost of opening a tent pole movie, you can change the status quo . -snip-
... I’m betting that unlike the current choices, you recognize the difference between politics and results.

Cuban is politically clueless. He realizes that Bush sucks, but he thinks that only a "bidness" man has the ability to right things.

[librechik]

43. true. However, he doesn't deserve to be singled out, if that is what happened

and I suspect it was.

[TexasObserver]

16. Yes, that's the Bush admin doing what they do! They're criminals.

They clearly poured over his IRS returns and SEC filings until they found something to complain about.

These people are unprincipled. They look at government as their personal handmaiden.

[fascisthunter]

30. Make Note: Right Wingers Hate Cuban Due to his Politics

I wouldn't doubt it

[Canuckistanian]

31. Yep. Sounds like the Spitzer deal.

Raise all the hell you want, but if you get TOO close to the truth, welllll..... let's just say we have ways of making you shut up.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

33. Interesting that it's only Democrats who get charged w/insider trading, Martha Stewart, etc..

n/t

[Truth Teller]

37. Cuban ia an asshole

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4483070

[HCE SuiGeneris]

39. You misinterpret my post.

I am in no way supporting or admonishing Mark Cuban. I am railing against selective prosecution by the assholes in the Justice Dept./BushCo Admin.

I did however read your OP and agree that he sounds like quite the douchebag.