Call them ALL out

[ronntaylor]

This Republican Senator broke the law. Pelosi disclosed her spouse’s trades as required by law.

This Republican is a slacker! He took about six months to report his sales. Rand Paul took more than a year to report his ivermectin sales via his wife.

 

[Eric]

We need a change of guard here.

 

[SuperMatt]

I’m still trying to figure out what the outrage is concerning Pelosi. The stock purchase was in mid-June. Is the idea that Pelosi knew the Senate was going to take up the issue a month later?

I tried to read about it from the right-wing sources ”covering” the story, but it’s just a bunch of “hot takes” with no explanation of how Nancy somehow knew the Senate (of which she isn’t a member) was going to advance the CHIPS act this month (it’s been floating around for a year), and somehow alerted her husband to that fact. They also claim the act will give $50 billion to NVIDIA, but that definitely isn’t true. What I’m seeing is that the act is NOT good for Nvidia (or AMD)… here’s a non-partisan tech site just looking at the business aspect:

AMD, Nvidia Shut Out as Intel Eyes $52 Billion CHIPS Act Windfall

Intel stands to gain the most from the CHIPS and FABS Acts.

www.tomshardware.com

However, Intel's most direct competition in the client computing, graphics, and server/HPC markets comes from AMD and NVIDIA. While AMD and NVIDIA are U.S.-based and design their own microprocessors, they contract outside firms like TSMC and Samsung to produce their chips. As a result, they wouldn't be able to reap the full benefits of the $52 billion windfall from the U.S. government.

"You have Intel that might get $20 billion with CHIPS Act plus $5 billion or $10 billion under the FABS Act," said an official for one unnamed Intel competitor that is opposed to the soon-to-be-voted upon version of the CHIPS and FABS Acts. "So, $30 billion goes to your direct competitor, and you don't get a penny? That's going to cause problems in the market."

So the bill is bad for Nvidia, and therefore bad for Paul Pelosi’s investment apparently.

Maybe we can see why serious news organizations aren’t touching this tempest in a teapot.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Since the bulk of this thread has gone down this path, @Herdfan can you recommend any sources on the right that frequently criticize the Republican party from a sane conservative perspective? I don’t think many people are going to get much depth existing in their mainstream media bubble and only using the other side’s mainstream media for the counter perspective. A lot of the sources I follow on the left equally see Pelosi as the enemy, possibly even more than the right sees her, or at least with more valid reasons than general purpose mud slinging.

 

[ronntaylor]

I’m still trying to figure out what the outrage is concerning Pelosi. The stock purchase was in mid-June. Is the idea that Pelosi knew the Senate was going to take up the issue a month later?

I tried to read about it from the right-wing sources ”covering” the story, but it’s just a bunch of “hot takes” with no explanation of how Nancy somehow knew the Senate (of which she isn’t a member) was going to advance the CHIPS act this month (it’s been floating around for a year), and somehow alerted her husband to that fact. They also claim the act will give $50 billion to NVIDIA, but that definitely isn’t true. What I’m seeing is that the act is NOT good for Nvidia (or AMD)… here’s a non-partisan tech site just looking at the business aspect:

AMD, Nvidia Shut Out as Intel Eyes $52 Billion CHIPS Act Windfall

Intel stands to gain the most from the CHIPS and FABS Acts.

www.tomshardware.com

So the bill is bad for Nvidia, and therefore bad for Paul Pelosi’s investment apparently.

Maybe we can see why serious news organizations aren’t touching this tempest in a teapot.

It's because the conservakooks start whining and lying, and so-called progressives wring their hands and cry "Oh, we're just as bad!" without looking into the exaggerations/outright lies.

The CHIPS for America Act was introduced (by a Republican sponsor) more than two years ago. Anyone with a decent brain knew there was money to be made. It wasn't a question of if, but when it would eventually be passed. Since some Republicans don't want to see anything good happen under a Biden-Harris administration, delays have prevailed. TBF, some Dems, especially Bernie who is the most vocal, are opposed to this as they see it as (more) corporate welfare with a possibility of money being flushed down the toilet.

 

[Eric]

They're all on the take from both sides to some extent, Pelosi is just the latest to be called out on it. The bottom line is it should be illegal for any sitting congressman or senator to trade stocks when they or their families own stakes in said companies they have ties with, period.

There are several sources if you look but here's a great example.

2020 congressional insider trading scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SuperMatt]

They're all on the take from both sides to some extent, Pelosi is just the latest to be called out on it. The bottom line is it should be illegal for any sitting congressman or senator to trade stocks when they or their families own stakes in said companies they have ties with, period.

There are several sources if you look but here's a great example.

2020 congressional insider trading scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I’m quite familiar with that incident. One could point to exactly what was done, and how it was nearly undeniable that it was based on COVID information given to Congress before the general public knew.

Rand Paul was mentioned earlier; he used his position to push lies about Ivermectin and profited from it.

Again, I’ve tried to determine what secret information Nancy had and how her husband benefitted from it. I have yet to see anything. I’d like to see further information if you’ve got a good source.

 

[Cmaier]

I’m quite familiar with that incident. One could point to exactly what was done, and how it was nearly undeniable that it was based on COVID information given to Congress before the general public knew.

Rand Paul was mentioned earlier; he used his position to push lies about Ivermectin and profited from it.

Again, I’ve tried to determine what secret information Nancy had and how her husband benefitted from it. I have yet to see anything. I’d like to see further information if you’ve got a good source.

Why are we even talking about this. Trump was literally demanding that the government hold conferences on his properties, buy his shit, etc. when he was president. Didn’t see the MAGAs up in arms back then.

 

[Eric]

Why are we even talking about this. Trump was literally demanding that the government hold conferences on his properties, buy his shit, etc. when he was president. Didn’t see the MAGAs up in arms back then.

View attachment 16071

Trump has always been held to a different standard, corrupt at nearly every level, it's just that nobody cares about it on the Republican side and Democrats are too timid to take a stand. He is, and will remain, above the law for the rest of his natural life I suspect.

But if you have a Republican House and Senate you can bet your ass they'll prosecute Nancy to the fullest extent of the law while Fox News masturbates over it on live TV.

Edit: simulation

 

[GermanSuplex]

The issue is not about me specifically calling them out, but in some cases, I don't disagree with them. So we need to make sure we are looking at things from the same point of view.

Come on, man!

You‘re pulling the Trump card here… “Only guilty people plead the fifth”, unless I do it. “The electoral college is a disaster for democracy!” unless I win by it, then it’s “brilliant”.

I understand your point, but you’re making excuses. I remember a convo we had on MR where you said you didn’t want any political statements in your racing when there was a BLM car. When someone drove a Trump car, you started with the “unless” excuses.

And I don't want to see him run again. I wish SCOTUS hadn't banned abortion, but I also am not ready to go as far as thinking thousands of lives are at risk.

Then you are ignoring doctors, nurses, counselors and mental healthcare professionals who do this for a living, and the accounts of thousands of women who barely survived. Some of them are no longer here to share their story, though I guess you’d ignore them if they were.

Quite frankly, your belief doesn’t change the facts. I can believe it wasn’t 90 degrees out today where I live, but it doesn’t mean jack shit, because it was.

 

[SuperMatt]

@Herdfan

I wish SCOTUS hadn't banned abortion, but I also am not ready to go as far as thinking thousands of lives are at risk.

One can look at other nations with abortion bans and also to the history of our country (pre-1973) for clear evidence that abortion bans lead to deaths of pregnant women. As @GermanSuplex said, it doesn’t matter if you believe it or not. You might not believe in gravity, but that won’t matter if you jump off a cliff.

 

[ronntaylor]

But if you have a Republican House and Senate you can bet your ass they'll prosecute Nancy to the fullest extent of the law while Fox News masturbates over it on live TV.

Prosecute her? On what basis? Unless you're privy to her giving info to her husband -- about a program that was in play for more than two years and sponsored by a GOP member -- there's nothing to see here. Rand Paul and Dianne Feinstein very likely used privileged info to reel in stock gains. Nothing happened. Loeffler and Purdue were dogged by credible insider trading accusations in the run up to their Senate fights. Nothing happened.

Pelosi's husband is a long-time finance and business guy and took advantage of a proposal started under the previous guy, a proposal similar to a program first used in the late 80s, and very much in the public realm. Republicans must be creaming their pants with the other side lapping up this bullshit story.

 

[Alli]

My point was simply a search on CNN.com didn't find it. Removing "Paul" didn't do it either.

Fox has nothing to do with what CNN's search engine finds.

Or their search engine is poorly designed.

Or your searching needs some work.

 

[Herdfan]

Or their search engine is poorly designed.

Or your searching needs some work.

View attachment 16100

I knew it was on Google. My point was it wasn't on CNN, at least not that their Search Feature could find it.

If you can find it on CNN, please post it.

 

[Deleted member 215]

In the spirit of calling out our own side, can we stop with calling black people "field n*****" and "Uncle Tom" when they support Republicans? Pretty disgusting on the part of white liberals, which I see from time to time.

 

[SuperMatt]

I knew it was on Google. My point was it wasn't on CNN, at least not that their Search Feature could find it.

If you can find it on CNN, please post it.

I don’t understand why CNN (or other networks) would have a reason to cover this “story” at all. I made a post asking for somebody to explain to me what law was broken, or even how her husband benefitted from a bill that actually advantages Intel over NVIDIA. Or even the slightest bit of evidence that she passed secret info to her husband. I’m still waiting.

 

[Pumbaa]

I knew it was on Google. My point was it wasn't on CNN, at least not that their Search Feature could find it.

If you can find it on CNN, please post it.

If you can give us a good reason why it should be on CNN, please post it.

 

[Eric]

In the spirit of calling out our own side, can we stop with calling black people "field n*****" and "Uncle Tom" when they support Republicans? Pretty disgusting on the part of white liberals, which I see from time to time.

Dude, I don't know a single person saying these things nor have I even heard of it until now. Got a source?

 

[Deleted member 215]

Dude, I don't know a single person saying these things nor have I even heard of it until now. Got a source?

Justice Thomas singled out for racist slurs after Roe v. Wade overturned

The social taboo against using racial slurs has once again flown out the window when it comes to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

www.washingtontimes.com

Obviously this article is full of nonsense, but the Corbett Tweet was real and I have encountered "Uncle Tom" used against certain black politicians among some on another forum I post on.

 

[SuperMatt]

Justice Thomas singled out for racist slurs after Roe v. Wade overturned

The social taboo against using racial slurs has once again flown out the window when it comes to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

www.washingtontimes.com

Obviously this article is full of nonsense, but the Corbett Tweet was real and I have encountered "Uncle Tom" used against certain black politicians among some on another forum I post on.

Wow. I regret clicking that link. My eyes are burning from the cluster-f of intrusive ads, and the other articles offered up to me are:

Hmm, maybe I should read about how Jill Biden hates half of America. Which half I wonder….