The charge of possible hypocrisy is more alluring than the charge of insider trading. In some quarters.

From Senator Richard Burr Sold a Fortune in Stocks as G.O.P. Played Down Coronavirus Threat by Eric Lipton and Nicholas Fandos.

Senators Burr, Feinstein, Inhoffe, and Loeffler are in the spotlight to explain why they respectively sold large chunks of shares after a Covid-19 briefing.

Everyone has their hot takes.

The rationalist/empiricist/legalist probably responds - "Its an accusation. Let's get the evidence. Correlation is not causation."

I am inclined to this view. Everyone is innocent till proven guilty. Let's see what was traded and under what circumstances. Was it done under their personal direction or was it done by the investment adviser. A lot of portfolios have been rebalanced or increased cash in the past few months given the anticipation that we are near the end of a long expansion. If these trades were done by an advisor based on a documented long term plan, then there is no issue. If, on the other hand, this is glaring insider trading, then bring some cases and obtain convictions.

I share Tucker Carson's take. If they are guilty of making these trades based the content of the briefing, then absolutely they should resign and, if convicted, be jailed. I think everyone is tired of there being one set of laws for the establishment and a stricter, harsher set of laws for citizens who are not members of the Mandarin Class establishment.

Whereas Carson tends to view this from a leadership perspective, I view it as an evidentiary and legal issue. Either way, if guilty, then punish.

Then there is a whole other take. Far less grounded in principle, law, evidence, or morality.

This is the segment of the populace, apparently primarily the media, who are focusing on whether it was hypocritical for Senators to sell stocks while reassuring the populace that Covid-19 was no need to panic.

This, to me, is the least consequential take possible. On my once every three-day supply run today, NPR was blithering on about this very issue. Were the senators guilty of hypocrisy? How is that even relevant given the possibility of insider trading? Who cares about hyopcrisy? They are all, after all, even ones we admire, to some degree hypocrites. They are politicians.

I am guessing the MSM is taking this perspective because they are acting as political activists. It is far easier to try and muster a digital mob for extrajudicial pressure to resign than it is to spend time, money and credibility actually framing a case, amassing the evidence, and presenting that information dispassionately to the public. While this is so far, a bi-partisan list of accused, the only Democrat, while high profile, is in bad graces with the hard left. I cannot recall her transgression, but she has been subject to fierce attack by the hard left. I suspect that they would be happy to see the back of her.

So you can view this from an empirical perspective (what's the evidence?) a moral perspective (how can you be leader of citizens if you are selling shares?) or you can view this from a political perspective (how can we take some scalps by accusing of hypocrisy?) Trust the MSM to take the least credible view.