Source: House GOP Aide Gave Info To Feds In Insider Trading Probe

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Dave Camp , R-Mich., questions Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner John Koskinen as he appears before the committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, June 20,... House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Dave Camp , R-Mich., questions Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner John Koskinen as he appears before the committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, June 20, 2014, in their continuing probe of whether tea party groups were improperly targeted for increased scrutiny by the IRS. The IRS asserts it can't produce emails from seven officials connected to the tea party investigation because of computer crashes, including the emails from Lois Lerner, the former IRS official at the center of the investigation who has invoked her Fifth Amendment right at least nine times to avoid answering lawmakers' questions. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Attorneys for the House Republican aide at the center of investigations into the leak of a Medicare policy change to Wall Street are providing information to the Justice Department, a source familiar with the legal negotiations told TPM on Thursday.

Because of that, a federal grand jury subpoena of the staffer has been withdrawn, according to the source.

Attorneys for Brian Sutter, the top health policy director on the House Ways and Means Committee, offered to provide the information that he would have given in grand jury testimony, the source said.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Sutter had been subpoenaed by the Justice Department to testify before a grand jury in Manhattan federal court. In a separate civil investigation, the Securities and Exchange Commission also subpoenaed Sutter as well as the committee for information related to the leak of a policy change to Medicare, which sparked stock trading in major health care companies before it was announced publicly.

Sutter and the committee both initially refused to comply with the subpoenas, and the SEC sued last week to compel them to comply. The agency stated it believed Sutter “may have been” the source of the leak. That lawsuit remains ongoing, separate from the Justice Department’s withdrawal of its subpoena.

The SEC lawsuit alleged that Sutter spoke with a lobbyist — identified by the Journal as Mark Hayes, a former aide to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) — on the day of the leak. The commission claimed Sutter spoke with Hayes by both email and phone and discussed the upcoming Medicare policy change, which reversed funding cuts for private insurers.

Hayes then allegedly informed a research firm, which distributed the flash that set off the trading, according to the SEC. Some companies saw as much as a 6 percent spike in shares in less than an hour of trading.

Latest DC
17
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for dnl dnl says:

    How much did Grassley make?

  2. But but… IRS! Benghazi! Um, um, Fast and Furious! Birth Certificate! ObamaCare! (any of this working?)

  3. Congress a den of thieves and Wall Street, a stop and frisk free zone.

  4. Any time those in DC tell us mere plebes that they don’t make their wealth from insider trading - can we call Dave Camp and Chuck Grassley to present their master class.

  5. Avatar for lew lew says:

    Insider trading in Obamacare being investigated for Benghazi veterans who used to work for the IRS but are now on Hilary Clinton’s staff.

    That should do it.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

11 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for doremus_jessup Avatar for sabatia Avatar for lew Avatar for eggrollian Avatar for nick1936 Avatar for tallyjohnson Avatar for sylhines Avatar for lamonth Avatar for afisher Avatar for tecmage Avatar for ignoreland Avatar for milehigh_sdfan Avatar for serendipitoussomnambulist Avatar for twowolves Avatar for dnl

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: