No, I'm not going to play that game. You can google yourself.
It's a matter of such renowned concern that you'd have to be willfully ignorant to not be appraised of it.

The gist of it is easy.
Either Congresspeople, Pelosi being within the top 5 or 10 in terms of returns- I can't remember- are omniscient, or they trade based on insider information they obtain in Congress.
It's a simple matter of math.
They perform better than professional investors at far, far above what would be possible given random chance. So they have some edge.
When you have a collection of people with an unspecified edge... you can guess that the edge may have something to do with that group of people.

No media source is evidence. Perhaps least of all, Fox News. Their trades are the evidence.
Did you think that was clever?

You're a fucking moron.
I said clearly that none of it rises to the evidentiary requirement for a criminal prosecution, but enough circumstantial evidence can, in fact, convict. And she's got heaps of it. Well, more accurately- her husband does.

Visa and NVIDIA trades come to recent mind, and there's the fact that they outperform professional investors by up to 50%.
I'll gladly stand with you and say, "We can't call them criminals". Because we can't.
But to say there's no evidence? No, that's flat out fucking political delusion.

Eyeroll. We don't know that eating chicken on Sunday is illegal until someone takes it to court and loses.
Give me a fucking break. Does that kind of logic strike you as insightful?

This is an assertion we can work with, but it's wrong.

More accurately, it fits the definition of what the courts have found not to be insider trading for as long as SEC rule 10b-5 has been in existence.

Trump has no fiduciary responsibility to any consumer of that information, or to the organizations he has the power to move.
While it's true that this is uncharted territory- it's uncharted in the same way that Congresscritters trading on insider information was. It required an act to make it illegal, because there's no fiduciary responsibility. That information didn't come from the inside- it came from the most outside place possible.

If we're being technical, insider trading doesn't exist.
There is securities fraud, and the SEC regulations and jurisprudence that amount to what we loosely call insider trading.
Securities fraud, of course, is illegal.

Correct.

Incorrect.
So very close to correct- but still incorrect.
Insider information is not information that the public doesn't know- if that were illegal.... lol.
Insider information is secret non-public information.
Knowing something before someone else and trading on it is not illegal.
Knowing something you weren't supposed to know because it wasn't supposed to be public and trading on it is securities fraud.

The time interval is a red herring. You are wrong without regard to it.

Na.
If that were the actual caselaw surrounding it, it would be fucking insane.

There needs to be a breach of fudiciary trust or confidence.
A third party monetizing their power to affect traded corporations, and people having a better read of that shitbag is not insider trading.

It is.

Stop using the word insider. It's a weasel word. There's nothing insider about this.

It's a markedly different form of ick.
Imagine someone finds out that the SEC is going to ban the trading of cryptocurrencies.
Imagine he tells the world.
Everyone who trades on that is guilty of insider trading.... for having traded on public information about entities that did not have that information in confidence?
No, this is someone monetizing their market moving power. It's fucking vile, but there's nothing "insider" about it.

The SEC won't do shit, because it cannot do shit.
1) This isn't insider trading.
2) Reacting off of privileged access to public statements is not insider trading. It must be confidential information about a traded entity.

This is a market mover charging for early access to his movement power.
There's nothing illegal about it, though it is pretty fucking vile.

Know how I know you're a racist piece of shit?

This is at least true- but mostly because Obama was a fucking hawk who enjoyed murdering the fuck out of people overseas.
Your racist horse shit notwithstanding.

Getting the votes to impeach is easy. Getting the votes to convict is de facto impossible.
At this point, do we really need more impeachment theater?
How about maybe just once this time, and then we can get them doing important work like trying to fucking curtail his ass with laws they can actually get through the Senate.

I like to think that the courts won't do anything because they are fucking constitutionally prevented from doing so.

But ya, BLM. Or Something.

What in the fuck are you talking about?

The Congress says precisely 1 thing about the Speaker- that Congress shall chose (chuse, if we're being accurate) it, which puts its firmly outside of the enforcement of the other branches.
The Constitution also says that only Congress shall set its rules, which also puts enforcement of those firmly outside of the enforcement of the other branches.

You need to be put before a court of law for your fucking ignorance, and desire to wield the state in ways it is prohibited from being wielded against people you don't like.

Fuck Mike Johnson- but seriously, fuck you more. You're the larger long-term risk than that piece of shit.

Wrong answer, dipshit.
1) Nobody ignores Congress insider trading.
2) Even that filthy practice comes nowhere fucking near selling early access to your posts because you know your elected office moves markets.

There's no TDS involved here. Your bootlicking is a fucking cancer.

Pelosi's "insider trading" is well-documented.
There are hordes of evidence- just nothing rising to a legal standard for criminal prosecution.
Which brings me to my next point- the one thing that makes the practice illegal is the STOCK act, which due to its late-reporting enforcement regime, effectively has no criminal penalties.
The Pelosis have outperformed the market at large by over 50%.
Do not defend those fuckers.

Of course, even that horseshit privileged-information trading, which is pretty obviously prevalent throughout Congress, doesn't come anywhere *close* to teh open fucking corruption of Trump.

You do know that insults where the other side has strong proof they are not true do not work, right? Well, probably that is already beyond you. ;)

Yup. This is precisely the situation. The investment bubble is undeniable. It is, however, not a given that it will collapse. Not all bubbles do.
But beyond the investment bubble- AI itself is very real.
When the dotcom bubble burst, it's not like e-commerce went away.
All the datacenters that were built- they didn't go away.
2 of my organizations datacenters were dotcom datacenters that were abandoned by Verio and picked up by us on the cheap, where we utilized them profitably for going on 2 decades now.