• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Nancy Pelosi's husband

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
29,548
16,747
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟471,967.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens

Laodicean60

Well-Known Member
Jul 2, 2023
5,114
2,472
65
NM
✟107,771.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
https://moneywise.com/news/investin...st-2-months-before-the-dojs-antitrust-lawsuit

Get this garbage out of politics. Nobody should be using their (or their spouses) positions to create wealth.

I want to believe this is a bipartisan post....but we'll see
I heard about this last night. Friends in high places. I've tried to look for congresspeople to see if they did they did the same because it's insider information. The serfs have no clue what's coming down the pipe and lose.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
30,479
30,296
Baltimore
✟847,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The stock is currently above where he sold it and the mild drop in the wake of the lawsuit is merely one of at least a dozen of similar magnitude over the last several years.

1727403446604.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Whyayeman
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
9,805
10,597
PA
✟460,446.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The stock is currently above where he sold it and the mild drop in the wake of the lawsuit is merely one of at least a dozen of similar magnitude over the last several years.
Eh, the fact that the stock didn't actually fall (significantly) in response to the lawsuit doesn't really change the fact that this looks fishy. Especially because it's not the first time he's sold a significant amount of a company's stock a short time before that company faced an anti-trust lawsuit.
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
13,417
4,724
Eretz
✟390,880.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
  • Agree
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
30,479
30,296
Baltimore
✟847,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Eh, the fact that the stock didn't actually fall (significantly) in response to the lawsuit doesn't really change the fact that this looks fishy. Especially because it's not the first time he's sold a significant amount of a company's stock a short time before that company faced an anti-trust lawsuit.
It did fall in response to the lawsuit, but it had already risen quite a bit since the time he sold it. And the lawsuit dip wasn’t that big.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟204,301.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Such trades are generally based on judgments about the relevant shares - unless there is inside knowledge. To substantiate the story it behoves the journal to demonstrate that such information had been acquired. There is none in the article.

I am not very keen on these speculative activities as a general rule, but a capitalist economy encourages them. Most of us want to live in a market economy - this might be part of the price we have to pay for the privilege.
 
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
9,805
10,597
PA
✟460,446.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
It did fall in response to the lawsuit, but it had already risen quite a bit since the time he sold it. And the lawsuit dip wasn’t that big.
Again, "I predicted incorrectly" isn't really a defense against allegations that you're trading based on insider information. Information is just information - even if you have inside information, you still have to predict what the response to that information becoming public will be. To be clear, I'm not saying that this is definitely insider trading, just that it looks fishy and that the defense you're putting forward isn't really a defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rambot
Upvote 0

rambot

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2006
29,548
16,747
Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
✟471,967.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Agree! He and Nancy should be held to account for insider trading! Hunter should for using his father's position to get paid!
Bringing up hunter?

Seriously?
Both parties do it
The stock is currently above where he sold it and the mild drop in the wake of the lawsuit is merely one of at least a dozen of similar magnitude over the last several years.

View attachment 355072
He couldn't have predicted the magnitude of the effect though
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Laodicean60
Upvote 0

Laodicean60

Well-Known Member
Jul 2, 2023
5,114
2,472
65
NM
✟107,771.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It did fall in response to the lawsuit, but it had already risen quite a bit since the time he sold it. And the lawsuit dip wasn’t that big.
When negative news or earnings are published no one knows the impact and he may have just taken some profit but he and the government people knew of the antitrust lawsuit before I did. Maybe this is part of the reason people get richer on government salaries. This is all very suspicious in my eyes and it's not the first time.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
30,479
30,296
Baltimore
✟847,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Again, "I predicted incorrectly" isn't really a defense against allegations that you're trading based on insider information.

Nor is selling shares some time before a bad event evidence that you possessed or acted on that information. When he sold the shares, the stock had climbed for a year and a half to an all-time peak at the beginning of February and then proceeded on a slow descent. He sold at the beginning of July.

Information is just information - even if you have inside information, you still have to predict what the response to that information becoming public will be. To be clear, I'm not saying that this is definitely insider trading, just that it looks fishy and that the defense you're putting forward isn't really a defense.
I don't know what he did or didn't do, but nobody has even established that Nancy knew anything about the investigation, much less that she told him about it.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟204,301.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
This is all very suspicious in my eyes and it's not the first time.
I think we need more than that. I think the Moneywise article is clickbait. It presents nothing to establish the claim.
 
Upvote 0

Laodicean60

Well-Known Member
Jul 2, 2023
5,114
2,472
65
NM
✟107,771.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think we need more than that. I think the Moneywise article is clickbait. It presents nothing to establish the claim.
I think the Democrats had a good idea of going after Trump's tax return because I feel all politicians must be transparent and ALL politicians should provide tax returns. Maybe this is clickbait but it does happen and there is a reason that laws were created.
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟204,301.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I think the Democrats had a good idea of going after Trump's tax return because I feel all politicians must be transparent and ALL politicians should provide tax returns. Maybe this is clickbait but it does happen and there is a reason that laws were created.
I agree. There should be openness in the financial affairs of politicians.

Nancy Pelosi declared this transaction. That has not been disputed. As far and I know her tax returns have not been problematic.

We cannot say the same about Trump's tax returns because he broke with the customary openness with the American public and refused to disclose his tax situation on becoming President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laodicean60
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,325
19,417
USA
✟1,133,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
There's no way you can run in those circles and not be informed. Who do you think they're talking to? They're engaging with their peers and discussing their work as others do. The ability to capitalize on those conversations is where they from the rest. To expect they won't occur is unrealistic.

~bella
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟204,301.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There's no way you can run in those circles and not be informed. Who do you think they're talking to? They're engaging with their peers and discussing their work as others do. The ability to capitalize on those conversations is where they from the rest. To expect they won't occur is unrealistic.

~bella
I agree. We do need some hard evidence when it is alleged. Innuendo such as the article in Moneywise doesn't cut it.
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
12,139
8,376
✟423,669.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Visa had dropped 5% in the week before he unloaded his shares, which btw wasn't all the visa stock he held apparently. He was just trying to reduce his potential losses if the drop had continued. It would have been something else if Visa was rising like gangbusters and he dumped, but the opposite is what happened.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,325
19,417
USA
✟1,133,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
I agree. We do need some hard evidence when it is alleged. Innuendo such as the article in Moneywise doesn't cut it.

The only time you'll get it is when they've stepped on the wrong person's toes like Martha did and they're trying to prove a point. Otherwise you'll see things like this. One of the perks of being a politician is access. The same holds true for venture capital. Combine the two and you get the Pelosi's.

~bella
 
Upvote 0

Whyayeman

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2018
4,626
3,133
Worcestershire
✟204,301.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The only time you'll get it is when they've stepped on the wrong person's toes like Martha did and they're trying to prove a point. Otherwise you'll see things like this. One of the perks of being a politician is access. The same holds true for venture capital. Combine the two and you get the Pelosi's.

~bella
So no actual evidence required? One is a politician and the other a an investor. Ergo . . .

There may have been inside information. I just prefer even a smidgeon of evidence.
 
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,325
19,417
USA
✟1,133,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
So no actual evidence required? One is a politician and the other a an investor. Ergo . . .

There may have been inside information. I just prefer even a smidgeon of evidence.

I think we understand the difference between ideal and reality. Let's pretend you're a successful business man and I'm in the industry and we're having lunch. You mention wanting to add something new to your portfolio that has potential but hasn't caught on and asked what I'd recommend.

See the problem? If we're friends I'll mention a few worth considering. Much like you'd query an expert in real estate, construction or any subject you didn't know much about. No one would think odd if you asked the others. People do it all the time.

But my knowledge carries more weight and has the potential to increase your net worth. As would the others if you're an investor. But society is less accommodating about the market because it's harder and view assistance as an unfair advantage. The aid you received from a friend isn't possible for most.

You're more likely to know a broker, agent or contractor than a financial professional. If they're helping their friends get ahead it's harder for the little guy and that breeds resentment. It's okay to know a broker who helps you flip houses. But doing the same in the market will warrant scrutiny.

Consider the beneficiaries...

You and your spouse
Your children and grandchildren
Your parents and siblings
Your friends and associates
Charitable organizations

You can impact more people by sharing advice than anything else. Few would turn it down and that's the dilemma. It's a monopoly of sorts if done intentionally.

~bella
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard T
Upvote 0