Both Trump and Avanatti are scum. Dems would no longer consider voting for Avanatti,Republicans still vote for Trump.
I'm not buying anything the feds are selling when it comes to this guy. Never mind the narrative is now shifting from extortion to "thought crime" of market manipulation in trying to establish motive. Hell, there's a dozen other reasons he could've been googling that besides trying to make a buck. Having said that, I have no doubt Avenatti would pull this crap
In representing his client(s) against Nike, Avenatti could make the argument that when playing hardball with Nike his strategy included making the case that short sellers were going to have a field day as details came to light. Dude could simply be researching how short selling works if not too familiar with it. In walking that tight rope, he simply could be researching insider trading case law to avoid going over the line. ^That's the thinnest of arguments, but how do you dispute it? You could bend my search history a million different ways to paint me a criminal.
Naaaaa, I don't buy that. I'd have to look at the rest of the searches in that given time-frame. You may be right, but I want to see other searches that led him to "put options", because that's not intuitively where one would start, if they were ignorant of the subject that is, which is what you are saying basically. Once again, we here at ET are speculating with only a thimble-full of facts.
True, though I don't personally approve of leaking such details before jury selection is over. Hell, even using someone's search history to prove a case is weak sauce, depending on the time frame & context. Just think of the million other reasons a lawyer or investor/trader would be searching for "put options" and "insider trading". How many times have you gone through that google rabbit hole of "what if" or "how does that work" when filing taxes for instance? Should curiosity be punishable and/or used in establishing motive? Again all speculation as more details come out.