Pelosi with another W - congressional stock ban bill won't come up for a vote

[Pressure]

This is a better breakdown from last year:

Unusual Political Trading

Track unusual house, senate, SCOTUS investing, and corporate lobbying for free using unusualwhales.com, as well as deep dive in the most unusual of trading + political deals. The go to place to see everything in finance, politics, investing, and options.

unusualwhales.com

But it's largely irrelevant beyond the strawman you're attempting to make.

Most people accept that congressional leaders use inside information to get a leg up on trades hence the reason it has a hard time passing, unlike say congress approving their own raise.


I'm from NC we had one of the premier examples: Tillis says Burr 'owes everybody' an explanation over controversial stock trades - POLITICO

Anyway as I said before, Pelosi won't be house leadership in a month. If it's as important as you say and she's the reason it's being help up it'll be passed in January to no harm to anyone

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Regardless, the plumline on whether or not she engaged in nefarious behavior isn't judged solely on whether her husband is or is not a good trader (profits and losses). It's whether or not his behavior is abnormal and aligns with privileged information.

Bullshyt. You're totally ignoring that fact that his trades don't even have to be based on privileged information if she directs policy based on what stocks she owns.

Medicare for All Act - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

121 sponsors and no one thinks it had a chance in hell of passing. You're being emotional.

So your ONE example is a left-wing bill (not a bipartisan bill) that is also blocked by corporate dems.

Anyway as I said before, Pelosi won't be house leadership in a month. If it's as important as you say and she's the reason it's being help up it'll be passed in January to no harm to anyone

This is why people see you as a Cac Mamba-level disingenuous poster. No one has claimed that Pelosi is the only corporate dem in leadership and it's especially bullshyt to act like the Democrats could magically get it done in two weeks after Pelosi blocked it for two years.

 

[CrimsonTider]

He didn't sell the stocks, he not only kept them but bought more and more. So now you're openly lying to defend your multimillionaire masters?

In fact, Pelosi bought more. Much more. Pelosi bought in two more tranches, her financial disclosure records show. As her office released today, those were on March 25, 2008 (10,000 shares at $64) and on June 4 (5,000 shares at $86). Pelosi ended up with nearly $1.3 million in shares at an average cost of $64.50.






The soft corruption is that they had massive holdings in Visa at the same time that Pelosi was considering bills that would directly impact Visa. In the end, the House passed a version of the bill that didn't hurt Visa's price at all, helping lead to the situation where that stock has doubled multiple times since she bought it despite the fact that we've had two recessions since then, bringing her massive profits that she wouldn't have if Visa had been hit with harder regulations.


And Visa was directly lobbying Congress including meeting with Pelosi directly and contributing to her accounts just before she made those stock purchases.


In 2007, Visa used an army of lobbyists to try to influence Pelosi, including one of her former advisers, Dean Aguillen, Newsweek reports. Aguillen left Pelosi's office to work for the lobbying firm Ogilvy. By law, he could not lobby Pelosi's office directly, but he did lobby Congress on the credit card issue and offered advice to other lobbyists on that particular mission.

In addition to exploiting the revolving door between Congress and lobbying firms, Visa's political action committee made a $1,000 donation to Pelosi's re-election campaign, Newsweek reports (Visa headquarters is in Pelosi's home district). Two days after that donation was made, Pelosi met with Visa executives in her office. Aguillen also contributed $1,000 to Pelosi and another $1,000 to the campaign arm of the House Democratic caucus in the first half of 2008.

Nothing about this changes Pelosi doesn’t own shares in visa

We all own visa shares

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

So Pelosi stalled for months and said she was against the Congressional stock ban, then did a fake about-face and said she would support it, then refused to support either of the already-proposed bills which both have plenty of bipartisan support, then put a Congresswoman who is against the whole thing in charge of drafting the bill, then claimed the negotiations were going well and the bill would come up for a vote, and now is saying there's just not enough time....which is entirely a product of her ensuring there would not be enough time.

The effort to ban members of Congress from trading stocks is mostly dead — at least for now

Both top lawmakers and the most dogged advocates of stock ban legislation seem to agree — Congress has run out of time to strengthen ethics.

news.yahoo.com

The effort to ban members of Congress from trading stocks is mostly dead — at least for now | Business Insider India

Politics Insider Article and News

www.businessinsider.in

And what's wild is even the bill that Pelosi isn't going to put to vote was weak as fukk. Look at the list here:

Pelosi’s Stock Ban Bill Isn’t Just Weak, It’s Dangerous

House Democrats made a point of criticizing Trump’s assault on government ethics, so it’s maddening to see their leadership adopting his most notorious ethics dodge just a few years later.

time.com

1. Would replace the government's strict rules for what constitutes a blind trust with weak-ass rules that would allow fake blind trusts like the one Trump had when he was president.

2. Would allow each branch of government to set their own rules for blind trusts, including the ability to refuse to disclose the contents.

3. Would allow ethics offices to waive penalties for violations due to "extraordinary circumstances."

4. Allows investment in "diversified" assets, without defining diversified (so, for example, officials with secret information or policy power over Covid would likely still be able to dump money into targeted medical or tech funds just so long as they didn't buy individual stocks).

5. Would allow government officials to hold banned assets if they receive them via gift.

6. Automatically defers capital gains taxes.




This is why Democrats have such weak support compared to their demographic numbers. No one believes they're the party of the working class/poor anymore. Too many of the corporate dems in power are just rich a$$holes who are grateful the other rich party is even bigger a$$holes.

At this point it's better nothing gets done than what was proposed. That proposal doesnt do anything other than "addressing" the issue for it to never be touched again.

Pelosi is leaving but certainly needs that advisory role while shes a private citizen to operate in the market freely lol

Maybe something with teeth will get passed in our lifetimes but she will never be subjected to it

 

[Wargames]

Well Karma is a bytch and her husband got his dome split

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Nothing about this changes Pelosi doesn’t own shares in visa

We all own visa shares

What the fukk are you blabbering about? So you ignore the donations Visa was making to her, ignore her advisor working for them to lobby Congress, ignore them getting a personal meeting with her directly after the donation, and straight lie about her buying over a million dollars in shares just a few weeks later?


In fact, Pelosi bought more. Much more. Pelosi bought in two more tranches, her financial disclosure records show. As her office released today, those were on March 25, 2008 (10,000 shares at $64) and on June 4 (5,000 shares at $86). Pelosi ended up with nearly $1.3 million in shares at an average cost of $64.50.

 

[MoshpitMazi]

Well Karma is a bytch and her husband got his dome split

Leave that man alone

 

[the cac mamba]

This is why people see you as a Cac Mamba-level poster.

what a compliment

 

[CrimsonTider]

What the fukk are you blabbering about? So you ignore the donations Visa was making to her, ignore her advisor working for them to lobby Congress, ignore them getting a personal meeting with her directly after the donation, and straight lie about her buying over a million dollars in shares just a few weeks later?


In fact, Pelosi bought more. Much more. Pelosi bought in two more tranches, her financial disclosure records show. As her office released today, those were on March 25, 2008 (10,000 shares at $64) and on June 4 (5,000 shares at $86). Pelosi ended up with nearly $1.3 million in shares at an average cost of $64.50.

There would have been lobbying whether she own stocked or not

You’re still not showing the insider information her husband benefited from while purchasing the largest stocks in the SP500. Everyone that follows the news knows what type of legislation is up for debate

These are stock plays are not abnormal. Show me a pattern of insider trading or pure pump and dumb like Trump and DWAC

 

[Professor Emeritus]

There would have been lobbying whether she own stocked or not

The issue is that by buying that stock, she personally benefits to the tune of millions from making decisions that agree with their lobbying efforts.

You’re still not showing the insider information her husband benefited from while purchasing the largest stocks in the SP500. Everyone that follows the news knows what type of legislation is up for debate

The insider information is that she has more control over steering the direction that legislation will go than anyone else. She could literally decide to kill the bill, or to lay the hammer down, or to pass some weak-ass shyt. She has far more knowledge of what she is going to do than someone "following the news".

But you keep missing that insider information is NOT the only issue here, it's not even the main issue. The issue is that owning the stock gives her a huge INCENTIVE to deliver puffball legislation. That's far worse to the American people than merely benefitting off of insider knowledge.

 

[CrimsonTider]

The issue is that by buying that stock, she personally benefits to the tune of millions from making decisions that agree with their lobbying efforts.






The insider information is that she has more control over steering the direction that legislation will go than anyone else. She could literally decide to kill the bill, or to lay the hammer down, or to pass some weak-ass shyt. She has far more knowledge of what she is going to do than someone "following the news".

But you keep missing that insider information is NOT the only issue here, it's not even the main issue. The issue is that owning the stock gives her a huge INCENTIVE to deliver puffball legislation. That's far worse to the American people than merely benefitting off of insider knowledge.

I disagree, any legislation is going to lessened in order to get passed.

I just don’t see where they are profiting off these stocks due to their position. Not the stocks that are being talked about. If they were shorting stocks or making money off of DWAC like trump it would be different.

The stocks were talking about damn near every American has in their 401k and pension plans