If, it's accurate, this should shake us all to our bones.
Mhm, why am I not impressed? Maybe because the article itself does not support the wrongdoing it claims?

It's basis is this:
Buffett: “I can’t be buying what Berkshire is buying and I’ve got some money around and therefore I go into my second choices or into tiny little companies.”

The shocking thing according to them is this:
roughly two decades of Buffett’s personal trades were included in a leak of IRS data obtained by ProPublica.....On at least three occasions, Buffett has traded stocks in his personal account in the same quarter or the quarter before Berkshire bought or sold shares of the same companies

Where are these 3 occasions of "insider trading", of Buffett profiting from knowing Berkshire moves? I was reading and re-reading the article. All I found was this:

In October 2012, Buffett made another noteworthy personal trade. Over several days, he sold $35 million worth of Johnson & Johnson shares. At that point, Berkshire had effectively revealed that it, too, had sold Johnson & Johnson shares.

What means "At that point"? And what "revealed"? Does "revealed" mean Berkshire sold a few days after Buffett did? So did he got a higher price than if he had waited with his sale until Berkshire's was done? "Revealed" is different from "sold". All it says is that Berkshire then made public a sale. Maybe a sale that happened before Buffett sold J&J himself, with him waiting with his own sale until the sale from Berkshire did influence the market price (with him getting a lower price then).

Without naming exact dates for both sales that's just sensational BS --- and the authors are of course know that.

If, it's accurate, this should shake us all to our bones.
Mhm, why am I not impressed? Maybe because the article itself does not support what it claims?

It's basis is this:
Buffett: “I can’t be buying what Berkshire is buying and I’ve got some money around and therefore I go into my second choices or into tiny little companies.”

The shocking thing according to them this:
roughly two decades of Buffett’s personal trades were included in a leak of IRS data obtained by ProPublica.....On at least three occasions, Buffett has traded stocks in his personal account in the same quarter or the quarter before Berkshire bought or sold shares of the same companies

So I was reading and re-reading the article, looking for the details of those three occasions. All I found was this:

In October 2012, Buffett made another noteworthy personal trade. Over several days, he sold $35 million worth of Johnson & Johnson shares. At that point, Berkshire had effectively revealed that it, too, had sold Johnson & Johnson shares.

What means "At that point"? And what "revealed"? "Revealed" is different from "sold". Does "revealed" mean Berkshire sold a few days after Buffett did? Or simply that Berkshire then made public a sale that happened before Buffett sold J&J himself, which of course would have been ok, with him waiting with his own sale until the sale from Berkshire did influence the market price (with him getting a lower price then). Without naming exact dates for both sales that's just sensational BS --- and the authors are of course know that.

The other "evidence" they name:
He sold $25 million of Walmart stock in his personal account, even as Berkshire almost doubled its stake

And what exactly is the point here? Where is he profiting from insider knowledge?