// Elements a prosecutor would need to prove
- The trader was a member of Congress, congressional staff, or federal employee.
- Trades were made in covered securities while in possession of material non-public information.
- The information was acquired by virtue of the person's federal position.
- The trades occurred in temporal proximity to acquiring or acting on the information.
- Disclosure obligations (PTR — Periodic Transaction Reports) were violated or untimely.
// What the platform's records tend to support
- Voting records cross-referenced against Periodic Transaction Reports filed by the member or immediate family.
- Trade timing within days of committee briefings, classified hearings, or vote scheduling.
- Patterns across multiple trades and votes that reduce the likelihood of coincidence.
// What public records cannot prove on their own
- Whether the specific trade was based on the specific non-public information vs. independent research.
- Whether a spouse acted with the member's knowledge or independently.
- The 'materiality' of the information at the moment of trade.
// Leading cases
United States v. O'Hagan, 521 U.S. 642 (1997)
Established the misappropriation theory underpinning the STOCK Act's congressional-knowledge framework.
SEC v. Cuban, No. 3:08-cv-2050 (N.D. Tex. 2013)
Clarified the duty-of-trust threshold for non-classical insider trading.
Reminder. This is an analytical mapping, not an indictment. Determinations of guilt require grand juries, indictments, trials, and proof beyond reasonable doubt — none of which a public OSINT site can substitute for. Use this map the way an ethics watchdog or investigative journalist would: as a framework for asking the right questions of the records that already exist.
GOBLIN HOUSE
[ Enter Database → ]