Paul Pelosi sold Google shares prior to DOJ antitrust suit

[Eric]

They're right to call the Pelosi's out on this, we need to root it out at all levels.

Paul Pelosi sold Google shares prior to DOJ antitrust suit

Paul Pelosi, the multimillionaire husband of former House Speaker and current Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., disclosed the sale of 30,000 shares of Google stock in December roughly one month prior to the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against the tech giant.

www.foxbusiness.com

 

[fooferdoggie]

even so its just a slap on the wrist.

 

[SuperMatt]

So, Pelosi has contacts inside the DoJ that give her stock tips for her husband? Is that the allegation?

It couldn’t have been because of the public knowledge that Google was laying off thousand of workers?

Pretty extreme allegation that a member of Congress has inside knowledge of upcoming DoJ investigations.

 

[dada_dave]

So, Pelosi has contacts inside the DoJ that give her stock tips for her husband? Is that the allegation?

It couldn’t have been because of the public knowledge that Google was laying off thousand of workers?

Pretty extreme allegation that a member of Congress has inside knowledge of upcoming DoJ investigations.

That’s a fair point, the timing is more in line with the layoffs than anything else … unlike when a bunch of republicans sold stocks and bought healthcare/3M stocks immediately after getting COVID briefings pre-pandemic.

They should all be forced to put their assets into a blind trust even for instances like this just to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

 

[Herdfan]

Pretty extreme allegation that a member of Congress has inside knowledge of upcoming DoJ investigations.

Not just a member of Congress, but Speaker of the House. She probably could know that.

They should all be forced to put their assets into a blind trust even for instances like this just to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

Hence, the PELOSI Act. Or Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities or Investments.

While a blind trust would be fine, I would rather see immediate full disclosure of all trades.

 

[SuperMatt]

Not just a member of Congress, but Speaker of the House. She probably could know that.

Are you alleging the Speaker of the House has spies in the DoJ?

That’s a much bigger scandal than any stock trade. Seems beyond stupid, if you have a somebody illegally feeding you secret information from the DoJ, that you’d use that info for your husband’s stock trade that would be publicly disclosed less than a month after being completed.

Lots of people have been dumping tech stocks due to all these layoffs. But Fox thinks there’s something bad because Pelosi did it, even with zero evidence of any wrongdoing.

Finally, to show you how utterly stupid this tempest in a teapot is: the stock is up about 10% since he sold it. He really made out like a bandit, right?

It’s just a load of from a network of s.

 

[Eric]

Just going to say that if this had been a Republican members here would be all over them like a cheap suit in the rain. The partisanship goes both ways, we should call this stuff out no matter who is doing it, it's wrong.

 

[dada_dave]

Just going to say that if this had been a Republican members here would be all over them like a cheap suit in the rain. The partisanship goes both ways, we should call this stuff out no matter who is doing it, it's wrong.

Let me turn that around, if the shoe were on the other foot, @SuperMatt and I should give them the same analysis we just did. Again the timing just doesn’t fit something scandalous but in the interest of fairness blind trusts would obviate the problem.

 

[Eric]

Let me turn that around, if the shoe were on the other foot, @SuperMatt and I should give them the same analysis we just did. Again the timing just doesn’t fit something scandalous but in the interest of fairness blind trusts would obviate the problem.

Couldn't agree more, would love to see that same defense and analysis had this been a Republican in the exact same situation.

 

[dada_dave]

Hence, the PELOSI Act. Or Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities or Investments.

Except Hawley doesn’t actually want it passed - too many of his colleagues make too much money and with Republicans in control of the House he knows it will never pass. Ironically if Pelosi was still Speaker it would have a much greater chance of passing. That combined with the name, it’s a stunt.

While a blind trust would be fine, I would rather see immediate full disclosure of all trades.

Funny I’m the opposite. Immediate full disclosure would be fine, but I’d rather see a blind trust. I’d rather them not be able to profit at all rather than a scandal if they did.

 

[dada_dave]

Couldn't agree more, would love to see that same defense and analysis had this been a Republican in the exact same situation.

If you want me to have a heart attack I could defend Boris Johnson’s handling of Ukraine, including the more stunt-like actions. Although that’s slightly different as it’s an action I largely agree with and a person I despise rather than actions that are suspicious but with clearly mitigating and explanatory factors. Hmmmm … I’ll think about it.

 

[ronntaylor]

Just going to say that if this had been a Republican members here would be all over them like a cheap suit in the rain. The partisanship goes both ways, we should call this stuff out no matter who is doing it, it's wrong.

In this instance, it's bullshit. Paul Pelosi made large trades in Google stock the previous two years that follow a pattern. These most recent trades (Dec 2022) have actually hurt financially. This is all about Faux noise infecting common sense.

 

[Eric]

At the very least this is bad optics, at most there is an actual crime being committed and in either case it should be investigated because it's not the first time with the Pelosi's. Members of congress with inside access should not be able to trade like this, it's been a problem for a long time that needs to be addressed.

While Hawley may be trying to score political points by attaching the Pelosi name to it, he's right to call it out for everyone.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

While this particular situation may be the Biden's classified documents of Congressional trading, it doesn't change the fact that plenty of the members have the uncanny ability to beat even Wall St experts on trading.

This site tracks it.

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

 

[rdrr]

While I think anybody should have access to the stock market and they buying and trading of stocks. I have to say I don't see the same level of scrutiny of our Congress Representatives that the general populous would have to put up with if they work in the financial sector.

From 1993 - 2005 I was employed by a few Financial Institutions as an IT administrator. I had to disclose my stock purchases all the time, and sign yearly attestations about my families involvements with publicly traded companies, trusts, etc. I was routinely restricted from buying and selling certain stock symbols periodically. If the company was negotiating in some sort of acquisition for another publicly traded company, you couldn't buy or sell that stock for X number of months. This greatly effected me during the dot-com correction and I was restricted from dumping a stock during its major decline.

I often frustrated by these reports, because they are misleading and politically slanted. However I do agree that there needs to be a lot more scrutiny and transparency around our public figures and their immediate family stock activity. If an IT guy who may have access to insider data, has to jump hurdles, so too should anyone else with potential insider information.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

IMO Wall St. needs to be crushed out of existence and build something better and waaaaay more regulated out of the ashes. It has too much say in how companies operate, how they treat their employees (and society in general), and whatever retirement may or may not look like as they cyclically lose it all and we get “Sorry, not sorry.” from them and our neutered and corrupt government. Not to mention the small army of people getting grotesquely rich doing absolutely nothing of value.

 

[bwinter88]

Not just a member of Congress, but Speaker of the House. She probably could know that.




Hence, the PELOSI Act. Or Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities or Investments.

While a blind trust would be fine, I would rather see immediate full disclosure of all trades.

Hey Herd! Busy schedule still or no?

If Hawley wanted to actually tackle this problem he wouldn't make it nakedly partisan by naming it after the person who already agreed to similar legislation a year ago.

Congress moves to ban members from trading stocks as Pelosi drops opposition

After months of resistance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has greenlighted a plan to ban members of Congress from trading stocks, CNBC confirmed Wednesday.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Eric]

Hey Herd! Busy schedule still or no?

If Hawley wanted to actually tackle this problem he wouldn't make it nakedly partisan by naming it after the person who already agreed to similar legislation a year ago.

Congress moves to ban members from trading stocks as Pelosi drops opposition

After months of resistance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has greenlighted a plan to ban members of Congress from trading stocks, CNBC confirmed Wednesday.

www.cnbc.com

What a stupid move on his part, especially if he wanted Democratic votes, which he would need. This is a legitimate issue that I think both sides want to tackle but they'll need to find a way without being so blatantly partisan about it.

 

[Citysnaps]

Are you alleging the Speaker of the House has spies in the DoJ?

I can't see that happening in Garland's DOJ. He's about as straight-arrow playing by the rules as they come.

Though maybe not quite as confident, I can't see Pelosi being engaged in that either.

 

[SuperMatt]

I can't see that happening in Garland's DOJ. He's about as straight-arrow playing by the rules as they come.

Though maybe not quite as confident, I can't see Pelosi being engaged in that either.

Which is my point. This allegation makes zero sense. It’s just another nonsense article by Fox News. Here are some other top stories they have on their site today.

Did Kamala Harris deliberately omit 'life' when referencing the Declaration of Independence? Americans react​

Mike Rowe warns government enabling millions of men to quit working​

‘Satanic golden medusa’ abortion statue outside New York City​

And on and on. Makes me want to buy a copy of Weekly World News for some real news. I wonder what Bat Boy is up to.