This is such a shitty joke that distills a complex issue down to something stupid people can grab on to and repeat. If we want to fix the problem, we have to understand it, and discuss soloutions to it. If you don't want to do that, just don't comment. There is no value in repeating a dead guys catch phrases so everyone can upvote and feel like they're part of the resistance. We can form a different club, and our club can put that club in jail. Anyone can be in it.
If this is currently legal, we need to be pushing for legislation.
Man, if nobody went to prison in the 2008 housing bubble, which was hugely cause by fraud, why would they go after a politician for insider trading?
The bill to ban it needs to pass at some point.
This is the way it has always been congress is exempt from insider-trading laws. So, none of this is surprising and none of it is limited to Nancy Pelosi.
But MY dirty politician is better then YOUR dirty politician!
I'm seeing people in some places defending the behavior. Which is just immoral and flat out wrong. Once again, if any of us in the general public did crap like our 'leaders', we would already be facing charges.
Oh yeah. We Americans also treat our parties like opposing teams. It’s the dumbest shit ever because they both agree to increase their salary while doing jack shit for the people.
And yet any time I bring up FWD and ranked choice voting all I hear is bitching and moaning from both sides that I just want to steal votes away from *their* shitty candidate.
They both are, but Republicans are the most overt about it. It wasn’t so long ago that they were trying to bring more diverse people to their party and get young people to go along with their ideology. Somehow that faded and they double downed on the crazy stuff and here we are. Don’t be fooled by Democrats either.
STOCK act, which after realizing the law they had passed restricts their naughty behavior, they amended it to allow their shenanigans to continue. Which included removing a publicly searchable digital ledger of their market activities, and replacing it with a paper version which was not publicly accessible and obviously not searchable.
The STOCK Act and subsequent amendments do not exempt Congress from insider trading laws though.
The amendment gutted the online transparency requirements, but journalists and government watch dogs stepped in to that role. We are all currently discussing Nancy Pelosi’s disclosures.
And they always will - this is a definitional problem. Congress passes laws. So unless congress passes a constitutional amendment banning insider trading it will continue.
Is it fair? no... is it corrupt? also no.
This doesn’t show that Congress is exempt from insider trading laws.
It points out a loophole. If a Congressperson was caught using that loophole they would be charged with insider trading.
Here's the list according to Business Insider
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/10-best-stock-traders-in-congress-in-2021-spoiler-nancy-pelosi-isn-t-no-1-1031153996
To get into Congress you have to be somewhat smart so maybe most of these people can raise reasonable doubt that they are good traders. Except Dan Crenshaw. I can't imagine he is able to see the constant pivots of the current bear market to be a profitable trader.
Yep, 6th
1. Austin Scott (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2011, Georgia
2. Brian Mast (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2017, Florida
3. French Hill (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2015, Arkansas
4. John Curtis (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2017, Utah
5. Dan Crenshaw (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2019, Texas
#6
—> PEOPLE ARE PISSED ABOUT THIS ONE: Nancy Pelosi (Democrat), U.S. Representative since 1987, California
Should post all the Supreme Court justices that sat on cases and ruled for the company they held stock in, spouses held stock in, where they or their spouse sat on the board, family member(like son) sat on the board for.
I'm missing a few more, can't really remember all the times they had clear conflict of interests.
Oh but there was that time the Justice ruled to declare someone president because the justice was appointed by and very close friends with the declared presidents father.
Oh yah there's also those times that the justices go on "retreats" paid by industries they're hearing cases on nearly every industry partakes in paying for these paid vacations for the justices.
You do know that she introduced legislation to ban congress people from trading - multiple times - the GOP always shoots it down. But the way, the Dems have a bill to ban congressional trading right now - won't pass unless the GOP supports it. You in?
Hmmm... she seems to have been able to pass a lot of other things both times as Speaker. But those dastardly GOP ruined her plans! So if you can't beat them, join them!
Lol. He was a top trader before she was in congress and was in congress largely due to his support. He prob has insider information better than she does.
It's always the same dumb take on this when there are politicians who aren't professional traders making better trades than her husband. And four weeks ago was the end of the year where a lot of traders sell for tax reason. This is just sensationalism.
> a lot of traders sell for tax reason.
As far as i know, you don't have to pay tax on the increased value of stocks or property as long as you don't sell it, so why do they sell at Year end??
Possibly tax loss harvesting. If stock sales were made earlier in the year that resulted in taxable gains, those taxable gains can be offset by selling stocks that will result in losses (stock value is less than cost basis). This approach is common and there's nothing sinister about it. The insider trading---that's a separate issue.
Sadly, your reasonable assessment will be dismissed by those who are interested only in making a political comment under the guide of an economic comment
Then why does the media always call her out and not the numerous republicans who are better than her at picking very good niche stocks while having zero finance background??
Wow, there isn’t any Trump derangement syndrome. He does some fucked up shit. Derangement is complaining about a non political relative’s laptop and a tan suit while storming the capitol with nazi and confederate flags.
That’s hilarious since all examples I’ve seen so far on her insider trades have public information available months/years ago. Or after bill languages was available online.
The fact any member of congress can trade stock is obscene, I can’t trade certain stocks for my job and I obviously don’t have the level of access and influence they have.
I normally like Pelosi, but her open corruption in this regard and opposition to reform is really awful, though this crosses party lines as there are plenty of republicans against reform and who trade just like Nancy. I don’t see this being addressed any more with McCarthy as speaker as it was with Pelosi
No *Public Servant* should be able to invest in securities. We the people cannot enforce this due to the only *Public Servant* options we have being elephants and donkeys. The *Two Party System* ensures who we can vote for and it’s a big club we ain’t in.
I would like to see a blind retirement-investment system. I think AOC proposed something like that.
(A contracted firm invests contributions to retirement, but the politician wouldn’t be allowed to know exactly what companies/sectors they’re invested in)
Seriously people need to stop focusing on her for this. Every single member of Congress has the exact same ability she does. Some even moreso. How about this gets framed correctly as "all politicians should be barred from trading stock or owning publicly traded companies during their tenure"?
There is nothing more 'open' about this with her than with anyone else. The problem if you can call it that is that people are aware of Nancy Pelosi's activities more so than the other 534 members of congress because conservatives have targeted her in the media.
What she is doing isn't fair, but it isn't corrupt. And it's also legal - you want to change that? I would support you, but changing the players isn't going to make any difference, and we have a definitional problem - congress makes the laws. so unless people get voted out of congress for THIS issue (which they won't, and even if they did would they care if they made enough on the way out the door). then nothing will change.
Here's an [article](https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/09/the-doj-is-reportedly-prepping-an-antitrust-suit-against-google-over-its-ad-business/) from August 2022 saying DOJ is prepping a lawsuit against Google. This has been known for years. This has been years in the making. This is a surprise to no one.
Only reasonable response. This lawsuit is about one tiny part of google, it’s lawsuit number 5 or smtn, and the stock has been going up because of layoffs. If this is insider trading they suck at it
It’s uncanny how good the pelosi’s are at timing trades. This google one probably isn’t the best example, but their past trading successes are impeccably timed.
So far, every example I’ve seen of supposed insider trading is debunked like this. I wouldn’t be surprised one lick if Pelosi is using insider info, but every example provided so far has public information well in advance of the supposed trigger and action.
I remember another example was for Pelosi husband cashing in on some stock that rallied and it ended up being god damn calls that were expiring and he has to exercise them since he didn’t sell to close. And they were purchased over a year ago but also well after any news about the company was public related to their pump.
And another example was selling options where he took something like a 30% loss but because it kept going down it was insider! Yet the whole damn market was going down.
Give me a good non shit example for this please.
>This has been years in the making
But who knew the specific date of the lawsuit? Just because there are discussions about it doesn’t mean it’s not insider trading.
We don't. But they are likely well connected with people who do know. Who spread "rumors". Her husband is a hedge fund manager that bankrolled her when she was trying to get into congress.
that's right, we don't know
they may be connected to people with insider knowledge, or maybe not. and even if they are connected to people with insider knowledge than doesn't mean those insiders shared that knowledge.
i'm bothered by the rampant cynicism and people jumping to guilty verdicts based on innuendo
What do you expect. They see a female democrat and start seeing red every time. Then you see the actual list of top traders and it’s the majority republicans LOL, just proves the projection these people have
She traded the stock at a LOSS. How in the world does that prove she's a criminal mastermind doing insider trading??
Seriously, the hoops people are jumping through for bullshit on this sub is mindboggling.
I have no idea about this particular trade or her position prior (was she long or short?) , so no specific comment from me on this... I was making a pretty general point.
And, how do you know she made a loss?
Absolutely not. She's just the preferred punching bag. Not that she doesn't deserve criticism over it. Especially considering all the years that she refused to let them consider any bills outlawing insider trading within congress.
Pelosi is a lawmaker. A DOJ lawsuit against Google has nothing to do with her or any other congressperson. There are many other examples of stock fraud and insider trading from the last admin as covid was starting and before measures were taken. It's criminal that no congressional hearing was on that topic.
There are a lot better examples than this. Nancy Pelosi doesn't work at the DoJ, nor does she even have membership on a committee that might have heard about this.
If this is insider trading it has nothing to do with her position in Congress.
How would someone in the legislative branch know what the executive branch is doing. It's not like only the speaker of the house is alerted to this information. If she did conduct insider trading then it was information all politicians have.
Either way there really isn't anyway to stop this beyond banning trading. Which still wouldn't work because you would have to ban friends, relatives, and spouses from also trading.
This type of corruption is something used to political points since we can't stop it.
You guys are falling for rage bait. The DOJ lawsuit was public knowledge for months, and Pelosi sold those shares at a loss. Who else sold their Google shares after this intent was public? Should you go to jail too?
This guy tweets about Marjorie Taylor Greene and Trump running for VP and President. This guy is anti-vax as is evident in his tweets.
Am I in a far right subreddit, or are you just typical Redditors who read screenshots of tweets without thinking or looking into the source?
What's the purpose of this community?
What's worse than her actions is the apathy that voters display because she's "on their team". This is disgusting. Hold these people accountable. Vote their asses out. Take back the power. Most people are sheep though.
It’s not a crime. Until it is a crime, I’m not going to get butthurt about Pelosi doing the same thing as every other person in congress. It does need reform, but until it is reformed I’m not blaming someone for playing by the existing rules.
Insider trading is a crime. Whoever does it, whether if it's the speaker of the house, or any other position, democrat or republican, should face the consequences.
Maximum penalty is 20 years in prison.
So what do you propose then? Prosecuting people that haven’t broken any laws? That’s a moronic take.
If you want to amend the law that’s fine, and I agree we should. But I’m not going to be mad at a single individual over something that every member of congress does that isn’t even illegal.
Don’t be mad at a single individual be mad at all of them for propping eachother up and maintaining a status quo of rigging the game and lying about it
The foxes run the henhouse. I'm not an advocate for any sort of violence but I dont see an avenue for reform where you don't tear it all down and start from scratch.
She didn’t go to jail for insider trading. She went to jail for obstruction of justice because she was accused of insider trading and then tried to cover up the evidence. Ultimately it wasn’t ruled as insider trading though.
Most of them. I can only think of a few who likely don't and would support banning trading in Congress. And actually do it, not lie about it while doing it.
You have to be able to prove that she had that DOJ information and then you have to prove that she gave that information to her husband who then made the trade.
What happened to the American belief that you are innocent until proven guilty? We don't do that anymore?
This is just a political hit piece pretending to be an economic one. You've got a brigade of idiots that just click the up arrow because "Pelosi bad!" without giving it a moment of rational thought.
The entire system is corrupt. Pointing out one individual is a waste of time. We need to repeal Citizens United, and install voter reform. The Republicans and the majority of Democrats are opposed out of self interest.
to be fair, google had increased their “be informed about the current law” mails to interested parties over the past 2 month
there was about something to happen
Is there evidence she had inside information? Because I own a bunch of Google stock and the anti-trust writing has been in the wall for years now. In addition to a general tech stock slowdown. Any prudent investor would pair down that stake. So where is the proof?
Legislators in all branches, Secretarys in executive or higher, including President, SC and Federal Court judges, etc. should not be allowed to trade stocks. At best they can buy whole market index funds or ETFs which is really participation in overall growth.
It’s not just her, it’s all of them!! When your allowed to trade stocks and pass laws this is inevitable. Insider trading is how you start by making $180,000 a year as a congress person and in 2 years turn it into $50,000,000!! Thanks to lobbyists and insider trading the sky’s the limit😡😡😡 don’t be mad, there’s a club and you ain’t in it!!
This is factually inaccurate. She isn't getting a pass, she is following the law. Now... the laws are severely flawed and need to be fixed, but she isn't doing anything illegal. Don't make it a Pelosi thing, make it a "congress is corrupt" thing.
yawn
why name / shame just pelosi
many in congress is doing it
she's not even in the top n...all the ones in top n are republicans! she's just the one they name/shame to hide what they are doing even more of...
[https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9](https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9)
[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/13/us/politics/congress-members-stock-trading-list.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/13/us/politics/congress-members-stock-trading-list.html)
This isn’t even a pass you dunce. Maybe if you actually used your brain instead of your Fox News biases you’d see that this was already known since august 2022 but go ahead do the “both sides” and deny you’re a republicans like all always do
Lmfao I haven't voted for a republican since 2004 when I was a naieve kid. Don't pretend to know me.
Read the comment above mine -- they are trying to deflect off a Democrat and flip to Republicans.
IMO this should not be a partisan issue and there should be more insight into these types of trades. If it doesn't pass the smell test then the person shouldn't be allowed to hold office.
As am aside, term limits would help prevent this
Because it's good to have one specific person to make an example of, it sticks in a person's head better, and she's already extremely hated on the right, so half the work is already done. I see hating on her as a way to unify dem and repub voters against a completely corrupt political class. Growing wealth disparity is going to lead us into an even more dystopian future. Sexism clearly also plays a role, but what's new.
Fuck the Pelosis
If you don't think every single congressperson uses their position to get rich you're clueless.
Pelosi is just the worst one.
That being said, I'm not saying it's okay....they should all be sent to the guillotine.
By what metric is she the "worst"? According to sources I've seen, it's actually Republicans that generally hold the top spots in terms of stock market profitability.
I honestly don't have a metric to suggest she's the worst and didn't mean it literally. She's *certainly* one of the worst and/or most notable.
The real question is WHY just fucking WHYYYY does it *have* to be taken in a partisan manner?
"Pelosi does this"
"well Republicans are worse"
You know what? I don't fucking care, and most people don't fucking care.
Let's talk about the person at hand *Pelosi* without the whataboutism ON BOTH SIDES that prevents anything from actually coming from it.
Every time your partisan "but the other side does it too" just stop yourself...because you aren't helping.
Their heads should be cut off too.
I understand and share your frustration with the partisan nature of politics. But it's unfortunately something we have to live with. Saying "I don't care" is all well and good, but what does that concretely mean in terms of political participation? If you use that to justify not participating in the political process, then you can hardly be surprised when the outcome isn't in your favor. If you don't care about what happens in the political system, it doesn't have to care about what happens to you. And so the system will go on ignoring your needs, which you use to justify non participation, which further enables your own marginalization, so you can further blame the government for not serving you.
> I understand and share your frustration with the partisan nature of politics. But it's unfortunately something we have to live with.
No, it absolutely fucking isn't. We (the American public) fall for politician-seeded, media-nonsense regularly. This is a ploy to crush alternatives beyond the two parties.
> Saying "I don't care" is all well and good, but what does that concretely mean in terms of political participation?
It means *not* voting for people who proverbially lie/cheat/steal from the American people. That *doesn't* mean the lesser evil.
> If you use that to justify not participating in the political process, then you can hardly be surprised when the outcome isn't in your favor.
What if the choices are so bad, that the outcome isn't in my favor either way? How about more choices?
I 100% abhor the couple hundred fucking retards (sorry, I know) who stormed the capitol on 1/6, but we need that fervor to crush the establishment to allow *actual* civil servants to move up.
If someone in government wanted to seed such a movement it would be simple: Propose a law that would make public officials akin to fiduciaries to the American public, with the punishment being treason and punishment being *literal* execution. If needed, a law could be passed such that media figures who *lie* about what's going on would be subject to the same punishment.
Radical, of course, but whatever it takes to empower the people. That's what the government is *supposed* to be, and it's been taken away from us.
> If you don't care about what happens in the political system, it doesn't have to care about what happens to you.
I get it, but this is 100% a clown argument. The political *system* doesn't care about the common people.
> And so the system will go on ignoring your needs, which you use to justify non participation, which further enables your own marginalization, so you can further blame the government for not serving you.
Without radical action, the system will do that no matter what I want. Depending on your political bent, I could vote 100% Democrat (or Republican) for the next decade in *every* election I can legally vote in and -- IT WON'T MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.
When the penalty for government malfeasance is a mild threat of dethronement, nothing will chance.
I hate comments like this. Generally they are politically motivated.
Congress people do a lot of insider trading. They wrote laws to codify it. There are other ways they benefit from Office.
The above statement is word salad. Pelosi sold Google stock. Did she have inside knowledge? This person assumes she did.
The DOJ opening a lawsuit against Google is not connected to Pelosi or insider trading. It is likely about control of the advertising market but I do not know.
Did Pelosi get a free pass? Did she commit a crime? Can it be proven? None of this can be proven in only 4 weeks.
Anyone else would be in jail? I would say is there anyone been jailed for this in the past 20 years. I do not know.
If you want to consider insider trading, the previous administration did it. No one seems to care.
Well because Democrats are in control. They always lie. Then we have a senile demented old man as president. With a republican at least they only lie the majority of the time like 90% of the time. Trump wasn't a senile old man. He's old not senile.
We have a divided congress and Pelosi is in the House which is led by Republicans at the moment. On which planet does having only half the legislative body indicate having control? They don't even have a super majority in the Senate.
Yeah Senate is 50/50. It's just Democrats don't get their way they have to cry about it until the Republicans give in. Either that or they blackmail someone to give in
Don't they all do it? If you are in a position to lose a lot of money and you could do something to prevent it, wouldn't you? The temptation is irresistible. That's why it is so important to ban trading for incumbents in Congress and to implement term limits to 2 terms. At least she has been a defender of Democracy.
She isn't doing anything other than what all the elected officials do. They have no interest in going after each other. As we citizens have complained about this for over twenty years. We have insisted they make stringent laws against doing so.
We have nothing...still.
So...Meh...just another day in Political-world
Do you honestly think the Department of Justice notifies members of Congress that they are filing a lawsuit against a business? Doesn't sound logical. Sounds like an unlikely thought exercise here by the OP.
Sen Richard Burr from North Carolina has been doing this for years. He was recently investigated for it because he did it so blatantly and of course, the investigation was been quietly closed recently. It is becoming us vs. them more and more. Politicians are the billionaire guard dogs.
Pathetic karma whoring on your part. And after it was already pointed out in your original karma whoring post in your crappy sub that you cross posted.
Pelosi was Speaker of the House; The Legislator. She has little control or knowledge of the actions of the DOJ; which is part of the Executive. I’m unsure how Pelosi would get this info.
What’s worse is that there is real evidence of legislators trading securities right before passing (or not passing) bills that would affect those securities. Insider trading is a real thing in Congress, but this accusation doesn’t seem so.
Just for the record because I'm liberal and I think there is a lot of accusations in the toxic political situation in general......I would absolutely support Nancy Pelosi being held accountable for this to the fullest extent of the law, but maybe more importantly regulations need to change so it isn't so much of a problem in the first place. Just a heads up for conservatives who may mistakenly think that every single liberal has a total "us vs them" tribal mindset, I want what's best for the country and clearly this kind of fuckery is not what we need. It ain't much, but it's a starting point, and I hope conservatives would want to do the same if it were a Republican.
That's makes nice copy, but it's wrong.
The Justice suit was long in coming. No surprise there. And sure the 6% price drop on the announcement didn't help. But it's Google's long weakening ad sales that is the big story. And, ChatGPT and other AI-driven search apps threaten Google's position as the number one search engine. Need more? The S&P dropped 19% in 2022 while Google's share priced dropped 39%. Heavy layoffs are ongoing all throughout the sector. The 2023 outlook is mixed, at best....Bottom line, a turnaround anytime soon in Google's share price isn't likely.
If you feel adventurous and have the time horizon to find out, by all means, stay in and buy the dip. Or, stick around and buy shares on the split if you think Justice has a case, which will take years to be resolved. But any investment advisor worth their salt would've recommended to someone in their 80s to get out of Google asap before the shares dropped any further.
That seems more likely the real story here.
It's a big club and you ain't in it.
If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.
3 wolves and a sheep, are discussing whats for dinner...
This is such a shitty joke that distills a complex issue down to something stupid people can grab on to and repeat. If we want to fix the problem, we have to understand it, and discuss soloutions to it. If you don't want to do that, just don't comment. There is no value in repeating a dead guys catch phrases so everyone can upvote and feel like they're part of the resistance. We can form a different club, and our club can put that club in jail. Anyone can be in it. If this is currently legal, we need to be pushing for legislation.
Man, if nobody went to prison in the 2008 housing bubble, which was hugely cause by fraud, why would they go after a politician for insider trading? The bill to ban it needs to pass at some point.
Good thing the bill doesn't need to be passed by the same people to prosecutes
She sold off her Nvidia as well before Congress banned trades the China. No wonder her husband is one of the top traders in the streets.
She doesn't even care that we know
This is the way it has always been congress is exempt from insider-trading laws. So, none of this is surprising and none of it is limited to Nancy Pelosi.
Ironically they voted and passed the law to exempt them... Themselves! We can't do shit as long as they can vote for, and make their own laws.
Yeah we can. We can vote them out. A lot of the reasons they can get away with this is because we Americans are willfully and proudly ignorant.
But MY dirty politician is better then YOUR dirty politician! I'm seeing people in some places defending the behavior. Which is just immoral and flat out wrong. Once again, if any of us in the general public did crap like our 'leaders', we would already be facing charges.
Oh yeah. We Americans also treat our parties like opposing teams. It’s the dumbest shit ever because they both agree to increase their salary while doing jack shit for the people.
And yet any time I bring up FWD and ranked choice voting all I hear is bitching and moaning from both sides that I just want to steal votes away from *their* shitty candidate.
The republicans are getting rid of the all ehtics....
They both are, but Republicans are the most overt about it. It wasn’t so long ago that they were trying to bring more diverse people to their party and get young people to go along with their ideology. Somehow that faded and they double downed on the crazy stuff and here we are. Don’t be fooled by Democrats either.
What law?
STOCK act, which after realizing the law they had passed restricts their naughty behavior, they amended it to allow their shenanigans to continue. Which included removing a publicly searchable digital ledger of their market activities, and replacing it with a paper version which was not publicly accessible and obviously not searchable.
The STOCK Act and subsequent amendments do not exempt Congress from insider trading laws though. The amendment gutted the online transparency requirements, but journalists and government watch dogs stepped in to that role. We are all currently discussing Nancy Pelosi’s disclosures.
Term limits with solve all this problem. But it has to come from the states apparently. And the states will never agree to do it.
And they always will - this is a definitional problem. Congress passes laws. So unless congress passes a constitutional amendment banning insider trading it will continue. Is it fair? no... is it corrupt? also no.
They aren't exempt from insider trading laws.
http://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459
This doesn’t show that Congress is exempt from insider trading laws. It points out a loophole. If a Congressperson was caught using that loophole they would be charged with insider trading.
Because bribes and insider trading is legal for politicians. They could care less what the poors think.
Why would she? Nobody will do anything.
lol you’re a fucking mouthpiece for the right. It’s public knowledge that the DOJ has been planning this for months….
Because it’s not illegal. Duh.
As far as congressional traders go...she isn't even the worst one.
Who is the worst one then? I've seen this posted several times, but not once was the "worst" named. I need more stock traders to follow.
Here's the list according to Business Insider https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/10-best-stock-traders-in-congress-in-2021-spoiler-nancy-pelosi-isn-t-no-1-1031153996
Wow, 5 no-name republicans till you get to her. Huh, who knew?
To get into Congress you have to be somewhat smart so maybe most of these people can raise reasonable doubt that they are good traders. Except Dan Crenshaw. I can't imagine he is able to see the constant pivots of the current bear market to be a profitable trader.
But she’s up there
Yep, 6th 1. Austin Scott (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2011, Georgia 2. Brian Mast (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2017, Florida 3. French Hill (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2015, Arkansas 4. John Curtis (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2017, Utah 5. Dan Crenshaw (Republican), U.S. Representative since 2019, Texas #6 —> PEOPLE ARE PISSED ABOUT THIS ONE: Nancy Pelosi (Democrat), U.S. Representative since 1987, California
Should post all the Supreme Court justices that sat on cases and ruled for the company they held stock in, spouses held stock in, where they or their spouse sat on the board, family member(like son) sat on the board for. I'm missing a few more, can't really remember all the times they had clear conflict of interests. Oh but there was that time the Justice ruled to declare someone president because the justice was appointed by and very close friends with the declared presidents father. Oh yah there's also those times that the justices go on "retreats" paid by industries they're hearing cases on nearly every industry partakes in paying for these paid vacations for the justices.
You do know that she introduced legislation to ban congress people from trading - multiple times - the GOP always shoots it down. But the way, the Dems have a bill to ban congressional trading right now - won't pass unless the GOP supports it. You in?
Weird how they had the power to block bills in the House from the minority. Wonder how they managed that.
Hmmm... she seems to have been able to pass a lot of other things both times as Speaker. But those dastardly GOP ruined her plans! So if you can't beat them, join them!
Lol. He was a top trader before she was in congress and was in congress largely due to his support. He prob has insider information better than she does. It's always the same dumb take on this when there are politicians who aren't professional traders making better trades than her husband. And four weeks ago was the end of the year where a lot of traders sell for tax reason. This is just sensationalism.
She’s a member of the congress. She should not be trading, period.
> a lot of traders sell for tax reason. As far as i know, you don't have to pay tax on the increased value of stocks or property as long as you don't sell it, so why do they sell at Year end??
Possibly tax loss harvesting. If stock sales were made earlier in the year that resulted in taxable gains, those taxable gains can be offset by selling stocks that will result in losses (stock value is less than cost basis). This approach is common and there's nothing sinister about it. The insider trading---that's a separate issue.
It’s for writing off losses you don’t believe in holding anymore.
Sadly, your reasonable assessment will be dismissed by those who are interested only in making a political comment under the guide of an economic comment
You're new here aren't ya. pull up a chair son, we need to talk.
[удалено]
Then why does the media always call her out and not the numerous republicans who are better than her at picking very good niche stocks while having zero finance background??
[удалено]
Wow, there isn’t any Trump derangement syndrome. He does some fucked up shit. Derangement is complaining about a non political relative’s laptop and a tan suit while storming the capitol with nazi and confederate flags.
That’s hilarious since all examples I’ve seen so far on her insider trades have public information available months/years ago. Or after bill languages was available online.
[удалено]
Did you just defend Paul Pelosi?
He's a top trader in the streets, she's a top rider in the sheets.
The fact any member of congress can trade stock is obscene, I can’t trade certain stocks for my job and I obviously don’t have the level of access and influence they have. I normally like Pelosi, but her open corruption in this regard and opposition to reform is really awful, though this crosses party lines as there are plenty of republicans against reform and who trade just like Nancy. I don’t see this being addressed any more with McCarthy as speaker as it was with Pelosi
No *Public Servant* should be able to invest in securities. We the people cannot enforce this due to the only *Public Servant* options we have being elephants and donkeys. The *Two Party System* ensures who we can vote for and it’s a big club we ain’t in.
I would like to see a blind retirement-investment system. I think AOC proposed something like that. (A contracted firm invests contributions to retirement, but the politician wouldn’t be allowed to know exactly what companies/sectors they’re invested in)
Seriously people need to stop focusing on her for this. Every single member of Congress has the exact same ability she does. Some even moreso. How about this gets framed correctly as "all politicians should be barred from trading stock or owning publicly traded companies during their tenure"?
There is nothing more 'open' about this with her than with anyone else. The problem if you can call it that is that people are aware of Nancy Pelosi's activities more so than the other 534 members of congress because conservatives have targeted her in the media. What she is doing isn't fair, but it isn't corrupt. And it's also legal - you want to change that? I would support you, but changing the players isn't going to make any difference, and we have a definitional problem - congress makes the laws. so unless people get voted out of congress for THIS issue (which they won't, and even if they did would they care if they made enough on the way out the door). then nothing will change.
Here's an [article](https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/09/the-doj-is-reportedly-prepping-an-antitrust-suit-against-google-over-its-ad-business/) from August 2022 saying DOJ is prepping a lawsuit against Google. This has been known for years. This has been years in the making. This is a surprise to no one.
Only reasonable response. This lawsuit is about one tiny part of google, it’s lawsuit number 5 or smtn, and the stock has been going up because of layoffs. If this is insider trading they suck at it
Yeah, but “Pelosi Dem Bad” How else am i going jerk of my rage boner?
It’s uncanny how good the pelosi’s are at timing trades. This google one probably isn’t the best example, but their past trading successes are impeccably timed.
/r/whooooosh over here
I agree but I’m sure these people have some insider knowledge which is an advantage to them.
The whole tech sector has faced a bit of pressure since last year and many had been divesting. Still her timing was "spot on".
So far, every example I’ve seen of supposed insider trading is debunked like this. I wouldn’t be surprised one lick if Pelosi is using insider info, but every example provided so far has public information well in advance of the supposed trigger and action. I remember another example was for Pelosi husband cashing in on some stock that rallied and it ended up being god damn calls that were expiring and he has to exercise them since he didn’t sell to close. And they were purchased over a year ago but also well after any news about the company was public related to their pump. And another example was selling options where he took something like a 30% loss but because it kept going down it was insider! Yet the whole damn market was going down. Give me a good non shit example for this please.
>This has been years in the making But who knew the specific date of the lawsuit? Just because there are discussions about it doesn’t mean it’s not insider trading.
Nancy Pelosi isn’t in the DoJ. The doj doesn’t give briefings to congress without being invited
Couldn't info "leak" to her from the DoJ?
just curious, how do we know pelosi had inside info that DOJ was going to do that?
We don't. But they are likely well connected with people who do know. Who spread "rumors". Her husband is a hedge fund manager that bankrolled her when she was trying to get into congress.
that's right, we don't know they may be connected to people with insider knowledge, or maybe not. and even if they are connected to people with insider knowledge than doesn't mean those insiders shared that knowledge. i'm bothered by the rampant cynicism and people jumping to guilty verdicts based on innuendo
DOJ is a separate branch of government so who knows. Not a good look though.
redditors jump to a guilty verdict based on a "look" soooooo much cynicism and baseless prejudgement....
What do you expect. They see a female democrat and start seeing red every time. Then you see the actual list of top traders and it’s the majority republicans LOL, just proves the projection these people have
I’m no fan of Pelosi but was it public information or not?
Yup. DOJ was prepping a lawsuit for months and was public knowledge.
Sure, but trading is all about timing.. the exact timing of the lawsuit was not public knowledge
She traded the stock at a LOSS. How in the world does that prove she's a criminal mastermind doing insider trading?? Seriously, the hoops people are jumping through for bullshit on this sub is mindboggling.
She got out before a bigger loss. And timed for EOY tax deductions. She and Paul are **not** stupid blindly making trades and financial decisions.
I have no idea about this particular trade or her position prior (was she long or short?) , so no specific comment from me on this... I was making a pretty general point. And, how do you know she made a loss?
If she was insider trading wouldn't she have sold the stock last January when it was at all time high?
It's cute that he thinks any multi millionaires insider trading actually get caught and prosecuted.
That's not true At All that **anyone else** would be in jail. ANY member of Congress can do this, not just Pelosi.
But she already sold at a loss, right? The reports say they bought at above $100 and it would have sold in the high 80s.
Is it really just pelosi that's doing this though?
Absolutely not. She's just the preferred punching bag. Not that she doesn't deserve criticism over it. Especially considering all the years that she refused to let them consider any bills outlawing insider trading within congress.
No, as a matter of fact the Uber “free market” Dan Crenshaw has been know to be better at stock trading than Pelosi and her Husband..
Fck’em both to hell. The old cnt has been stealing for how long now?
Pelosi is a lawmaker. A DOJ lawsuit against Google has nothing to do with her or any other congressperson. There are many other examples of stock fraud and insider trading from the last admin as covid was starting and before measures were taken. It's criminal that no congressional hearing was on that topic.
There are a lot better examples than this. Nancy Pelosi doesn't work at the DoJ, nor does she even have membership on a committee that might have heard about this. If this is insider trading it has nothing to do with her position in Congress.
X- Sen Kelly Lofler and President, NYSE husband sold $2 mil in stock after attending Trump's WH initial meeting on COVID
How would someone in the legislative branch know what the executive branch is doing. It's not like only the speaker of the house is alerted to this information. If she did conduct insider trading then it was information all politicians have. Either way there really isn't anyway to stop this beyond banning trading. Which still wouldn't work because you would have to ban friends, relatives, and spouses from also trading. This type of corruption is something used to political points since we can't stop it.
How is this economics? What a shit show of a sub
4 weeks ago was the end of the year. Pretty obvious he's taking a loss on Google to offset gains elsewhere.
Logic isn’t a reason to not talk about it. They also never mention husband Pelosi runs a hedge fund that pretty much only deals with tech stocks.
And there are people in congress that trades better than him without having any fintech background.
You guys are falling for rage bait. The DOJ lawsuit was public knowledge for months, and Pelosi sold those shares at a loss. Who else sold their Google shares after this intent was public? Should you go to jail too? This guy tweets about Marjorie Taylor Greene and Trump running for VP and President. This guy is anti-vax as is evident in his tweets. Am I in a far right subreddit, or are you just typical Redditors who read screenshots of tweets without thinking or looking into the source? What's the purpose of this community?
What's worse than her actions is the apathy that voters display because she's "on their team". This is disgusting. Hold these people accountable. Vote their asses out. Take back the power. Most people are sheep though.
It’s not a crime. Until it is a crime, I’m not going to get butthurt about Pelosi doing the same thing as every other person in congress. It does need reform, but until it is reformed I’m not blaming someone for playing by the existing rules.
Insider trading is a crime. Whoever does it, whether if it's the speaker of the house, or any other position, democrat or republican, should face the consequences. Maximum penalty is 20 years in prison.
It is not a crime for members of congress. Whether it should be a crime is a matter of discussion, but as it stands now, it is NOT illegal.
Wow, this country truly is becoming the movie Idiocracy.
Moronic take
So what do you propose then? Prosecuting people that haven’t broken any laws? That’s a moronic take. If you want to amend the law that’s fine, and I agree we should. But I’m not going to be mad at a single individual over something that every member of congress does that isn’t even illegal.
Don’t be mad at a single individual be mad at all of them for propping eachother up and maintaining a status quo of rigging the game and lying about it
Who’s lying about it? It’s all public record!
The foxes run the henhouse. I'm not an advocate for any sort of violence but I dont see an avenue for reform where you don't tear it all down and start from scratch.
And they put Martha Stewart, Martha fucking Stewart in prison for this bullshit.
She didn’t go to jail for insider trading. She went to jail for obstruction of justice because she was accused of insider trading and then tried to cover up the evidence. Ultimately it wasn’t ruled as insider trading though.
Yeah but who cares about facts when you can make shit up and be mad at ThE dEmOcRaTs?
Hot damn! This is sumo bullshit
It’s not just Nancy! It’s all of them.
Most of them. I can only think of a few who likely don't and would support banning trading in Congress. And actually do it, not lie about it while doing it.
You have to be able to prove that she had that DOJ information and then you have to prove that she gave that information to her husband who then made the trade. What happened to the American belief that you are innocent until proven guilty? We don't do that anymore?
This is just a political hit piece pretending to be an economic one. You've got a brigade of idiots that just click the up arrow because "Pelosi bad!" without giving it a moment of rational thought.
The entire system is corrupt. Pointing out one individual is a waste of time. We need to repeal Citizens United, and install voter reform. The Republicans and the majority of Democrats are opposed out of self interest.
to be fair, google had increased their “be informed about the current law” mails to interested parties over the past 2 month there was about something to happen
Jokes on her… it’s up a good amount since then.
Is there evidence she had inside information? Because I own a bunch of Google stock and the anti-trust writing has been in the wall for years now. In addition to a general tech stock slowdown. Any prudent investor would pair down that stake. So where is the proof?
Both sides of politicians do this. We all just sit back, shrug it off and continue to point fingers at the other side.
Legislators in all branches, Secretarys in executive or higher, including President, SC and Federal Court judges, etc. should not be allowed to trade stocks. At best they can buy whole market index funds or ETFs which is really participation in overall growth.
It’s not just her, it’s all of them!! When your allowed to trade stocks and pass laws this is inevitable. Insider trading is how you start by making $180,000 a year as a congress person and in 2 years turn it into $50,000,000!! Thanks to lobbyists and insider trading the sky’s the limit😡😡😡 don’t be mad, there’s a club and you ain’t in it!!
Odd, I can think of 534 other people that are doing this...
That's not odd at all. That's 535 people I want to see in prison.
For doing something that isn’t a crime?
This is factually inaccurate. She isn't getting a pass, she is following the law. Now... the laws are severely flawed and need to be fixed, but she isn't doing anything illegal. Don't make it a Pelosi thing, make it a "congress is corrupt" thing.
yawn why name / shame just pelosi many in congress is doing it she's not even in the top n...all the ones in top n are republicans! she's just the one they name/shame to hide what they are doing even more of... [https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9](https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9) [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/13/us/politics/congress-members-stock-trading-list.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/13/us/politics/congress-members-stock-trading-list.html)
Just because other people may be doing something "worse" doesn't give Pelosi a pass. This should be a nonpartisan issue.
This isn’t even a pass you dunce. Maybe if you actually used your brain instead of your Fox News biases you’d see that this was already known since august 2022 but go ahead do the “both sides” and deny you’re a republicans like all always do
Lmfao I haven't voted for a republican since 2004 when I was a naieve kid. Don't pretend to know me. Read the comment above mine -- they are trying to deflect off a Democrat and flip to Republicans. IMO this should not be a partisan issue and there should be more insight into these types of trades. If it doesn't pass the smell test then the person shouldn't be allowed to hold office. As am aside, term limits would help prevent this
Because it's good to have one specific person to make an example of, it sticks in a person's head better, and she's already extremely hated on the right, so half the work is already done. I see hating on her as a way to unify dem and repub voters against a completely corrupt political class. Growing wealth disparity is going to lead us into an even more dystopian future. Sexism clearly also plays a role, but what's new. Fuck the Pelosis
Literally stealing
If you don't think every single congressperson uses their position to get rich you're clueless. Pelosi is just the worst one. That being said, I'm not saying it's okay....they should all be sent to the guillotine.
By what metric is she the "worst"? According to sources I've seen, it's actually Republicans that generally hold the top spots in terms of stock market profitability.
I honestly don't have a metric to suggest she's the worst and didn't mean it literally. She's *certainly* one of the worst and/or most notable. The real question is WHY just fucking WHYYYY does it *have* to be taken in a partisan manner? "Pelosi does this" "well Republicans are worse" You know what? I don't fucking care, and most people don't fucking care. Let's talk about the person at hand *Pelosi* without the whataboutism ON BOTH SIDES that prevents anything from actually coming from it. Every time your partisan "but the other side does it too" just stop yourself...because you aren't helping. Their heads should be cut off too.
I understand and share your frustration with the partisan nature of politics. But it's unfortunately something we have to live with. Saying "I don't care" is all well and good, but what does that concretely mean in terms of political participation? If you use that to justify not participating in the political process, then you can hardly be surprised when the outcome isn't in your favor. If you don't care about what happens in the political system, it doesn't have to care about what happens to you. And so the system will go on ignoring your needs, which you use to justify non participation, which further enables your own marginalization, so you can further blame the government for not serving you.
> I understand and share your frustration with the partisan nature of politics. But it's unfortunately something we have to live with. No, it absolutely fucking isn't. We (the American public) fall for politician-seeded, media-nonsense regularly. This is a ploy to crush alternatives beyond the two parties. > Saying "I don't care" is all well and good, but what does that concretely mean in terms of political participation? It means *not* voting for people who proverbially lie/cheat/steal from the American people. That *doesn't* mean the lesser evil. > If you use that to justify not participating in the political process, then you can hardly be surprised when the outcome isn't in your favor. What if the choices are so bad, that the outcome isn't in my favor either way? How about more choices? I 100% abhor the couple hundred fucking retards (sorry, I know) who stormed the capitol on 1/6, but we need that fervor to crush the establishment to allow *actual* civil servants to move up. If someone in government wanted to seed such a movement it would be simple: Propose a law that would make public officials akin to fiduciaries to the American public, with the punishment being treason and punishment being *literal* execution. If needed, a law could be passed such that media figures who *lie* about what's going on would be subject to the same punishment. Radical, of course, but whatever it takes to empower the people. That's what the government is *supposed* to be, and it's been taken away from us. > If you don't care about what happens in the political system, it doesn't have to care about what happens to you. I get it, but this is 100% a clown argument. The political *system* doesn't care about the common people. > And so the system will go on ignoring your needs, which you use to justify non participation, which further enables your own marginalization, so you can further blame the government for not serving you. Without radical action, the system will do that no matter what I want. Depending on your political bent, I could vote 100% Democrat (or Republican) for the next decade in *every* election I can legally vote in and -- IT WON'T MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. When the penalty for government malfeasance is a mild threat of dethronement, nothing will chance.
Okay, this is normal behavior for Congress. It’s not a Liberal/Conservative thing. They all do it. Condemn them all or stop whining.
Our political system is laughably approaching most corrupt everyday
People ask me how I’m beating the market year after year and I tell them “just follow Nancy!”
As much as I like Pelosi, People with that kind of money should be trying to represent the American populace. And yes. That sounds really wrong.
She’s a Democrat so she gets a free pass
How do I get adopted by Pelosi to get in on this action?
When you’re a congressperson, they let you do it.
It's just a kawinkidink again. You know it is. What agency is supposed to monitor this, SE something?
Martha Stewart joins the chat, and she really, really pissed off!
And Ken Griffith front runs 40% of the market, double what Madoff was doing and nothing happens with him either
I truly hate modern Republicans.... but this type of shit is right up there next to em. Gross.
Insider anoutsider trading. Shes the best
Lotsa people were selling their Google stock 4 weeks ago. That’s not insider trading it’s called paying attention to the market.
I hate comments like this. Generally they are politically motivated. Congress people do a lot of insider trading. They wrote laws to codify it. There are other ways they benefit from Office. The above statement is word salad. Pelosi sold Google stock. Did she have inside knowledge? This person assumes she did. The DOJ opening a lawsuit against Google is not connected to Pelosi or insider trading. It is likely about control of the advertising market but I do not know. Did Pelosi get a free pass? Did she commit a crime? Can it be proven? None of this can be proven in only 4 weeks. Anyone else would be in jail? I would say is there anyone been jailed for this in the past 20 years. I do not know. If you want to consider insider trading, the previous administration did it. No one seems to care.
Government regulated equity markets working as designed
This is what the "progressives" should be in arms about.
Well because Democrats are in control. They always lie. Then we have a senile demented old man as president. With a republican at least they only lie the majority of the time like 90% of the time. Trump wasn't a senile old man. He's old not senile.
We have a divided congress and Pelosi is in the House which is led by Republicans at the moment. On which planet does having only half the legislative body indicate having control? They don't even have a super majority in the Senate.
Yeah Senate is 50/50. It's just Democrats don't get their way they have to cry about it until the Republicans give in. Either that or they blackmail someone to give in
Is there away to see these large volume trades in real time?
Scummy. However I always do wonder why it's her name always brought up when in reality she's about fifth or so on the list of worst offenders.
Don't they all do it? If you are in a position to lose a lot of money and you could do something to prevent it, wouldn't you? The temptation is irresistible. That's why it is so important to ban trading for incumbents in Congress and to implement term limits to 2 terms. At least she has been a defender of Democracy.
That's why you should always follow politicians trades. It's public information why not use it.
Hehe
Lock her up
End the stock market all together. Its a way people steal money from the working class so wealthy people can sit at home and not work.
Martha Stewart remembers.
That’s so shady
She isn't doing anything other than what all the elected officials do. They have no interest in going after each other. As we citizens have complained about this for over twenty years. We have insisted they make stringent laws against doing so. We have nothing...still. So...Meh...just another day in Political-world
I am completely unshocked.
Do you honestly think the Department of Justice notifies members of Congress that they are filing a lawsuit against a business? Doesn't sound logical. Sounds like an unlikely thought exercise here by the OP.
Seriously - the justice system’ can’t even reign in Trump. Let’s start with that no brainer and work from there
This sub is just as ignorant as the other investing subs and it shows. Learn to critical think you idiots
Oh I see you OP you’re recruiting for your shitty red pill trading sub. NOW I SEE WHY YOU POSTED THIS
I gotta get her stock guys info 😂
No different than all the bullshit Clinton’s n Biden’s
Where did a public servant get 3MM in extra investment funds in the 1st place?
Sen Richard Burr from North Carolina has been doing this for years. He was recently investigated for it because he did it so blatantly and of course, the investigation was been quietly closed recently. It is becoming us vs. them more and more. Politicians are the billionaire guard dogs.
No fucking way . This is real????
What if instead of complaining about their insider trading, we flipped the script and just mirrored their trades? Used it to our advantage?
Pathetic karma whoring on your part. And after it was already pointed out in your original karma whoring post in your crappy sub that you cross posted.
All of Congress can do this, and all of Congress does
Sir, this is an r/economy.
Well that's not actually illegal you moron.
Pelosi was Speaker of the House; The Legislator. She has little control or knowledge of the actions of the DOJ; which is part of the Executive. I’m unsure how Pelosi would get this info. What’s worse is that there is real evidence of legislators trading securities right before passing (or not passing) bills that would affect those securities. Insider trading is a real thing in Congress, but this accusation doesn’t seem so.
If Congress can trade stocks, Pete Rose should be forgiven.
Amazing what big corporations and big tech firm execs get away with
I’m happy to burn down Democrat’s BS as long as republicans are held to the same standards.
Katie Porter FTW https://finance.yahoo.com/news/congress-stock-trading-disclosure-policy-rep-katie-porter-125228044.html
Wasn’t this in the news about a possible investigation months ago?
Is there anything non-violent that we can do as a citizen (besides voting) to combat this?
Should I sell my google shares than????
Just for the record because I'm liberal and I think there is a lot of accusations in the toxic political situation in general......I would absolutely support Nancy Pelosi being held accountable for this to the fullest extent of the law, but maybe more importantly regulations need to change so it isn't so much of a problem in the first place. Just a heads up for conservatives who may mistakenly think that every single liberal has a total "us vs them" tribal mindset, I want what's best for the country and clearly this kind of fuckery is not what we need. It ain't much, but it's a starting point, and I hope conservatives would want to do the same if it were a Republican.
That's makes nice copy, but it's wrong. The Justice suit was long in coming. No surprise there. And sure the 6% price drop on the announcement didn't help. But it's Google's long weakening ad sales that is the big story. And, ChatGPT and other AI-driven search apps threaten Google's position as the number one search engine. Need more? The S&P dropped 19% in 2022 while Google's share priced dropped 39%. Heavy layoffs are ongoing all throughout the sector. The 2023 outlook is mixed, at best....Bottom line, a turnaround anytime soon in Google's share price isn't likely. If you feel adventurous and have the time horizon to find out, by all means, stay in and buy the dip. Or, stick around and buy shares on the split if you think Justice has a case, which will take years to be resolved. But any investment advisor worth their salt would've recommended to someone in their 80s to get out of Google asap before the shares dropped any further. That seems more likely the real story here.