Josh Hawley introduces PELOSI Act to bar lawmakers from trading stocks and profiting while in office
Sen. Josh Hawley introduced the PELOSI Act on Tuesday, following a previous bill he introduced barring members from trading stocks
A Republican in the
U.S. Senate is looking to prevent lawmakers and their spouses from trading stocks on which the officials would have privileged information and used the bill's title to make a not-so-subtle dig at former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/josh-ha...ing-office
So it's called the Pelosi Act because the Pelosi's traded semiconductor stocks for a loss.
"The bill comes after revelations last year that Nancy’s husband, Paul Pelosi, traded between $1 million and $5 million of stocks for semiconductors just days before Congress allocated $52 million to the industry. The stocks were later sold at a loss to remove the appearance of impropriety."
I'm all for this. Anyone in the public trust who has access to nonpublic financial info must be restricted from trading their positions in those companies they regulate. For members of Congress, or the President or the Vice President, presumably that's every company.
But Hawley calling it the Pelosi act strikes me as extremely insincere and perhaps with poison pills. I doubt this goes anywhere.
(01-25-2023, 04:25 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I'm all for this. Anyone in the public trust who has access to nonpublic financial info must be restricted from trading their positions in those companies they regulate. For members of Congress, or the President or the Vice President, presumably that's every company.
But Hawley calling it the Pelosi act strikes me as extremely insincere and perhaps with poison pills. I doubt this goes anywhere.
I agree. It’s a sound concept but attaching Pelosi’s name to it is a political stunt that will ensure its failure. It’s childish.
It was never going to pass. You could name it the save the babies act and it wouldn't pass.
(01-25-2023, 03:17 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]So it's called the Pelosi Act because the Pelosi's traded semiconductor stocks for a loss.
"The bill comes after revelations last year that Nancy’s husband, Paul Pelosi, traded between $1 million and $5 million of stocks for semiconductors just days before Congress allocated $52 million to the industry. The stocks were later sold at a loss to remove the appearance of impropriety."
(01-25-2023, 04:25 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I'm all for this. Anyone in the public trust who has access to nonpublic financial info must be restricted from trading their positions in those companies they regulate. For members of Congress, or the President or the Vice President, presumably that's every company.
But Hawley calling it the Pelosi act strikes me as extremely insincere and perhaps with poison pills. I doubt this goes anywhere.
(01-25-2023, 04:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2023, 04:25 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I'm all for this. Anyone in the public trust who has access to nonpublic financial info must be restricted from trading their positions in those companies they regulate. For members of Congress, or the President or the Vice President, presumably that's every company.
But Hawley calling it the Pelosi act strikes me as extremely insincere and perhaps with poison pills. I doubt this goes anywhere.
I agree. It’s a sound concept but attaching Pelosi’s name to it is a political stunt that will ensure its failure. It’s childish.
Go search for the Pelosi trade tracker on twitter. She is blowing every fund and top market player away. She is able to hide a lot of the trading and most are coming from Paul now.
You have 2 options: she has the best model in the world, beating the best hedge funds, or she has insider knowledge.
Paul just dumped 30,000 shares 1 month ago and now google is being investigated.
The semiconductor trade didn't really lose money, at first glance it did, but there was something else to it that made it beneficial. Can't remember exactly what it was.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
(01-26-2023, 12:50 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2023, 03:17 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]So it's called the Pelosi Act because the Pelosi's traded semiconductor stocks for a loss.
"The bill comes after revelations last year that Nancy’s husband, Paul Pelosi, traded between $1 million and $5 million of stocks for semiconductors just days before Congress allocated $52 million to the industry. The stocks were later sold at a loss to remove the appearance of impropriety."
(01-25-2023, 04:25 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I'm all for this. Anyone in the public trust who has access to nonpublic financial info must be restricted from trading their positions in those companies they regulate. For members of Congress, or the President or the Vice President, presumably that's every company.
But Hawley calling it the Pelosi act strikes me as extremely insincere and perhaps with poison pills. I doubt this goes anywhere.
(01-25-2023, 04:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I agree. It’s a sound concept but attaching Pelosi’s name to it is a political stunt that will ensure its failure. It’s childish.
Go search for the Pelosi trade tracker on twitter. She is blowing every fund and top market player away. She is able to hide a lot of the trading and most are coming from Paul now.
You have 2 options: she has the best model in the world, beating the best hedge funds, or she has insider knowledge.
Paul just dumped 30,000 shares 1 month ago and now google is being investigated.
The semiconductor trade didn't really lose money, at first glance it did, but there was something else to it that made it beneficial. Can't remember exactly what it was.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
He exercised the options he bought a year before and then sold them for a loss. The RWNJs jumped up and down for a while until they realized the loss on the trade didn't support their narrative. Then they went back into their little buttholes
Let's see if I can make this simple; Pelosi is using her influence to get rich and powerful. Hawley is demagoguing Pelosi for fame. It's almost like they know how to exploit their positions for personal gain. And we fight about who is more right. Lol.
(01-26-2023, 01:44 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Let's see if I can make this simple; Pelosi is using her influence to get rich and powerful. Hawley is demagoguing Pelosi for fame. It's almost like they know how to exploit their positions for personal gain. And we fight about who is more right. Lol.
1 part Go jags go
1 part Boo tacks boo
Church it up like Joe Dirte
The tasty beverage of politics
Why am I reading this subforum, [BLEEP] you Henne