The Rank Corruption & Brazen Insider Trading of Mike Ramone
You thought Mike Ramone was a corrupt a-hole? JUST READ THIS
A $2.83 million windfall for a vote.
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
You thought Mike Ramone was a corrupt a-hole? JUST READ THIS
A $2.83 million windfall for a vote.
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
this is crooked even by Delaware standards! He belongs in jail not on the ballot
He should also be in jail for using his office to get a political opponent fired. The charges are piling up.
Ramone’s public persona has been that of the ‘nice guy that everybody likes’. Sorta like Jeff Mack, who had a similar intellectual capacity, and who turned out to have issues of his own.
The lie has now been put to that public persona.
But, but, but… he was so concerned about the law when he was putting the screws to PAWS over a Facebook post.
Asshole.
House leadership is protecting Ramone.
The basic, root-level problem with Mike Ramone is that he’s one of the five or six stupidest people in the General Assembly, and if you eliminate the downstaters he’s near the top.
Someone give me a nudge when WDEL picks this up.
You’ll have to give WDEL a nudge if you want them to know about it. They’re busy with the Brandywine Hundred wolf.
A little background music, please:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctsWdUaHsHM
And here I thought it would be Duran Duran.
Nah, Peter MacArthur & The Wolf made more sense.
Give them some time. Amy Cherry eventually covered the earlier Ramone/PAWS story.
the vote on this bill passed 40-1 in house, and 20-0 in the Senate (ie Democrats counted here as well). you really think one person had huge influence on this bill when it passed overwhelmingly?? …not so much..you folks are dreaming of scandal that doesn’t exist. Every one in Delaware I know knew about this “potential” opportunity and this was “potentially” going to come into being and could have taken advantage. It was common knowledge among the general public, in all the papers and such. Do your homework! The counter to this “scandal” argument is it could have gone belly up and crashed and burned and all invested money could have been lost. That is what people do, they take risk on something. you all could have as well taken the risk and gotten the reward. How the real world works friends.
Everyone *kj knows knew about it, so there you go. Case closed.
[*self awareness of a guppy]
Ethics, and ethical compliance with the duty to disclose and when appropriate to recuse, is not about what the margin of the vote was.
If you find a judge has let someone off, and took a substantial amount of money from that defendant, then you don’t say, “Well, he wasn’t guilty and would have gotten off anyway,” because that’s not really the POINT. It really doesn’t matter if the judge’s decision, or a jury’s ultimate decision, was or was not the result of unlawful influence or whether “it wouldn’t have mattered anyway.”
And is the precisely that sort of thinking by people who profess to know “how the real world works” which renders them to be untrustworthy as leaders in this world. When we have laws, rules and norms which are intended to penalize the world working in particular ways, then it is those who nonetheless insist on working that way who are exactly the sort of people at whose behavior the law was directed. It is why we made it a law.
And, in the event you were considering it, “But Hillary…” is not going to be an adequate preface to any counterargument on this subject.
Well said.
It isn’t about the influence he had. It’s about conflict of interest. Yes, it is how the real world works. I suppose you’re one of those people who says that when you’re being raped you should lie back and endure it.
Alby, No I am not one of “those” people nor do I think you painting me as one of those people is even fair given you know nothing about me or my background. I just know in this particular case a person had potential investment information that the general public had as well, chose to take a risk on an investment that could just as easily gone south , and now it is a problem in the eyes of the author. That is simply not fair to call someone on that.
He owned more than 10% of the company. On that basis alone he was obligated to recuse himself. Deal with it.