791–800 of 816 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I too wonder why "Nancy Pelosi" has become basically synonymous with Congress insider trading when she's not even close to the top of the list among congresspeople.
You really need to wonder? The 10 best performing historical congress people stocks are all republican,a ll men, all funded by lobbys like heritage foundation... But the face of insider trading becomes a democrat and a woman Its sooo diffcult to guess why it happened
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All corruption is bad. This is true, just like "all lives matter" is true, and it misses the point in the exact same way. Those people you are replying to are not saying that this soldier should get away with his corruption because more powerful people are getting away with theirs. They are saying that those who abuse greater power are doing greater harm, and that their corruption should be punished with greater ur…
Two wrongs don't make a right. Legitimizing small time corruption because bigger corruption exists just legitimizes corrupt behavior in general. It should be offensive no matter who does it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Congressional Gang of Eight said they were not informed (even though they're supposed to be).
Maybe that’s their resentment - that they could have profited from it and didn’t.
Perhaps one of the silver linings we eventually get from current happenings is meaningful anti-insider trading legislation, with criminal penalties, timely reporting, nonpartisan enforcement. In principle that legislation could happen as soon as 2/2027. Or perhaps not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Legitimizing small time corruption because bigger corruption exists just legitimizes corrupt behavior in general. It should be offensive no matter who does it.
Are you my high school football coach defending their bully quarterback son as he terrorizes half the grade and punishing “tattle tails”?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congress (plausibly) beats the market: https://www.ft.com/content/14339d5b-5a5f-4e4a-8293-ff3a2e25d... Pelosi has made many suspicious trades: https://insider-trading.org/the-nancy-pelosi-insider-trading... Suspicious trades before Trump's Iran announcements: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cge0grppe3po
Beating the market isn't evidence of insider trading. Everyone invested deeply in tech beat the market, which is what Paul Pelosi did. If he did trade with insider information, he did it in a way that was subtle enough to look sufficiently like normal trading. This is nothing like the smoking gun of a 4x spike on oil futures 1 hour before a major announcement or a hyperspecific bet on Polymarket.
Somehow, Congress beating the market simply on savvy is huge ask to believe.
Isn't this the purpose of Polymarket? To give a more accurate picture of what is going on/going to happen by giving insiders a financial incentive?
Sure, but the purpose of the FBI is to go after people leaking classified military Intel. Different people and organizations in this world have different goals. More news 10.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People vastly overestimate the power of armies. Trump has gotten shot once, almost twice. Shinzo Abe got murked by some pipes from the hardware store.
And how are the people who shot these politicians doing now? How about the US and Japanese governments? Clearly shooting a politician doesn't mean either that you gain their power or that the power structure they led evaporates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just ban gambling. That solves good part of it. Then ENFORCE EXISTING LAWS. That solves good part of it. Talking about any other solutions will have to wait for govt that's not crooked. It doesn't need revolution, it needs to not have criminals at helm
I'm a little confused by your comment. Insider trading is already illegal (this case proves it). If the problem is under-enforcement, then I agree that better enforcement is the fix. Banning gambling is a completely separate intervention addressing a different activity, and clearly wasn't required to bring charges in this case. The tendency of governments to create new laws instead of enforcing existing ones is how w…
Personally I think the system shouldn't be so easily overloaded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beating the market isn't evidence of insider trading. Everyone invested deeply in tech beat the market, which is what Paul Pelosi did. If he did trade with insider information, he did it in a way that was subtle enough to look sufficiently like normal trading. This is nothing like the smoking gun of a 4x spike on oil futures 1 hour before a major announcement or a hyperspecific bet on Polymarket.
But the suggestion a bunch of Lawyers are better traders than average also stretches creduility. Somehow, Congress beating the market simply on savvy is huge ask to believe.