The Rothschilds getting news faster because they build an information network is not inside trading. Inside trading is when you have a legal and fiduciary duty not to trade and not to disclose information. The people working in the US government have that obligation and are not abiding by those rules.

> Therefore, why not assume every trade is insider dealing, unless proven otherwise?

This kills the crab.

(investors are driven out of markets when it is obvious that they are being cheated)

> The truth is that any empire needs to pick off rivals and rob them, in order to keep the empire going.

This also kills the crab. (And most of us along the way: we're already in a limited kind of world war, the sort of thing that has a history of escalating)

Who else here is old enough to remember when Martha Stewart got jailed for insider trading?

Sending a letter containing public information to a place that hasn't heard yet is not insider trading, even if you own the post office. Algorithmic trading firms are doing the modern equivalent of this at all times to arbitrage the NYC/LON/HK exchanges.

The classic example is that sitting outside a factory and counting trucks does not result in insider information, but driving the trucks does. Even though it is the same information.

> There will always be opportunities for insider trading, and there always have been. The Rothschilds could get news across Europe quicker than the kings could, so they made vast fortunes.

That is not an example of insider trading

funny aside: rothshields were mentioned more than trump in the epstein files, yet no outlet even touched that fact..