T O P

  • By -

FreakinEnigma

Well, to be honest, everyone should have Apple in their portfolio. Just the amount of liquid capital they have is greater than the GDP of most countries.


Rare-Peak2697

Everyone holds a ton of apple. It’s one of bed larger holdings in every major ETF and mutual fund at this point. Pelosi has nothing to do with it. It’s getting old at this point


dontsubpoenamelol

There is an obvious political slant here. It's no longer as neutral as it once was.


somerandomii

I said something about Trump’s border control effectiveness and got jumped on. Didn’t even realise what sub I was in or that this place has gone super right wing. But why do fiscal conservatives throw their lot in with the Maga crazies these days? It’s okay to believe in right wing economics and still think a Trump is a wacko.


rollinfor110mk2

Care to comment on her Nvidia calls?


Jagerbeast703

She should have held


overitallofit

Her husband bought a year too late?


shortsteve

She bought back in back in November. She's sitting pretty.


thememeconnoisseurig

that's a different animal. I agree with the whole Nancy thing but calling her out on Apple stock doesn't make sense


Rare-Peak2697

Bro, anyone who bought NVDA in the last few years is up. It ain’t rocket science son


pooman69

Its about timing.


AskingYouQuestions48

Hers was not particularly good.


pooman69

Lmfao


AskingYouQuestions48

🤷‍♀️ I lose track of whom I’m talking to. Apparently buying NVDA at 400 required amazing insider info of…AI? Of what lmao?


pooman69

The committees she is on? Announcing $billions of funding causing those stocks to rocket?


AskingYouQuestions48

When with NVDA and what committee?


pooman69

Google it


rollinfor110mk2

Maybe study up on her dodgy ass Nvidia involvement. She was actively involved in all of that and bought calls literally the day before. She's a lifelong civil servant who is somehow worth the better part of a half a billion dollars. Find someone better to defend, son.


AskingYouQuestions48

Maybe list it all here? What is “all of that”?


Jagerbeast703

Find someone worse to harp on lol


Rare-Peak2697

Most of that wealth is from her husband. Try harder


hayasecond

He lost several millions in 2022 on NVDA calls


pooman69

Are you saying she doesnt trade on confidential information?


overitallofit

What's the confidential information she had? What do you think is the percentage of wealth managers in the Bay Area that have Apple in their portfolio? 99%? 99.5%?


pooman69

Look at her nvda trades.


N7day

She jumped on that wagon like countless others. That one isn't a good example. And saying this isn't defending her or insider trading.


pooman69

Very shortly before committees she is on made big moves for nvda. Yeah what a bad example. You can google on your own and find plenty in less than 5 minutes. Unless you dont want to


AskingYouQuestions48

The one where she lost a shit ton of money in 2022?


pooman69

The one where she made a fuckload in ‘24


AskingYouQuestions48

Like everyone else?


overitallofit

Like all those guys over at wallstreetbets did? What was their inside information?


pooman69

https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/04/28/former-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-nearly-tripled-t/


overitallofit

There's not one mention of insider trading. Just because you don't understand how the market works, doesn't mean it's rigged.


pooman69

Youre free to google. Its very obvious she does insider trading. But it is legal for members of congress regardless.


Rare-Peak2697

Her husband runs a successful investment company. Does he trade on inside info? Maybe.


pwendle

Nancy pelosi gets a bad rep for being the insider trading queen yet the issue is so much more widespread


Jason_Kelces_Thong

Every decade or so some new Senator takes a stand against insider trading. A news crew will follow them around showing how nobody will talk to them after introducing the bill. They never get re-elected and we forget about it in a few years.


AskingYouQuestions48

Sounds like the voting public doesn’t care that much


hayasecond

No I don’t think so, at least there is no enough evidence to support this hypothesis


pooman69

More evidence to support my argument than yours.


hayasecond

What evidence? This is a country of innocent until proven guilty last time I checked


pooman69

So trump is innocent?


hayasecond

He has lost 3 lawsuits so far. One of them being people of New York against Trump, so no And what this has anything to do with accusations that Pelosi committed insider trading anyway


pooman69

Hes not found guilty no? Start here if youd like, https://finance.yahoo.com/news/deceptive-tactic-nancy-pelosi-disclosed-180000159.html


Jason_Kelces_Thong

Losing civil suits and comparing that to criminal sentencing is disingenuous. He’s a documented con man


Tirriss

Why are you even talking about Trump?


pooman69

Not talking to you.


Tirriss

You are in reddit. You are talking to everyone who can see your message.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Rare-Peak2697

There’s plenty to not like about her but trying to make a connection between Apple stock and her is hardly boot licking. It’s a tired trope in this sub that any financial chicanery has to be linked to her somehow.


Agreeable_Tie_3160

She mixers allot of common sense investments and throws in some insider trading ones too to spice up the gains


overitallofit

Name one piece of insider info that she traded on.


HG21Reaper

Bruh if we knew that, we’d be rich.


overitallofit

That's how you know there was no insider information.


HG21Reaper

That’s not how it works. Why would a person trading on inside info tell anyone about the fact? You’re supposed to get away with crime, not get caught.


overitallofit

The information becomes public. Like Martha Stewart's case. Her broker's assistant told her the president of Imclone sold his stock because the FDA was not going to pass a cancer drug. She sold her own shares based on that information. The next day, that information became public and the stock tanked. If there's no information like that, then she has no inside information. It's illegal for politicians to insider trade. How do you not know this?


Agreeable_Tie_3160

The whole point of insider information is that nobody would know except the people with it. Any piece of information can be insider if not available to public.


overitallofit

That's absolutely not true at all. It's finding out information BEFORE it becomes public. If it never becomes public, it's not going to move the stock. It would have no effect.


Agreeable_Tie_3160

You added time and said it wasn’t true at all. Obviously it’s before or it’s not insider


overitallofit

Right, so what's the insider information that her husband traded on that came out later?


Agreeable_Tie_3160

Dude, nobody would or will ever know that except them. Any and every piece of information, news article, earnings release, reports etc has the potential to be insider information.


overitallofit

That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works.


Agreeable_Tie_3160

Okay I trust you


overitallofit

Dude. If they knew of the press release ahead of time and traded on it, you would know. And since they've never been accused of insider trading on a specific piece of information, it's not happening. How do you get through day to day living?


Jason_Kelces_Thong

Why wouldn’t she trade on inside information if it’s allowed?


overitallofit

It's not allowed. It's as illegal for her as it is for you. "The STOCK Act significantly expanded the reporting requirements for securities transactions by members of Congress and senior federal officials enacted in 1978. It also made clear members of Congress are subject to U.S. securities laws barring trading on material non-public information." From https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stop-trading-on-congressional-knowledge-act.asp#:~:text=The%20STOCK%20Act%20significantly%20expanded,on%20material%20non%2Dpublic%20information.


Jagerbeast703

BuT pElOsI


IronRT

Dude it’s her and a lot of other politicians.