top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 175 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Of course she doesn't care now, she's only a few years away from retiring or dying on the job anyways

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 79 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    ... and has her coffers more than filled 👍

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    She's really going to get hers and then pull up the ladder behind her, eh? What a boomer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 39 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This is a huge about-face by her. Why couldn't she have done this when she was still in power?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    She stopped supporting it when it had a real chance of passing. Performative progressivism is the Democrat way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Nah it looks like she was for banning trades using insider trading, and against banning Congress members and their spouses from trading stocks.

    If your husband/wife's entire career is trading stocks I highly doubt you'd be for such. It's hypocritical that she would be for it now though. She should have kept her stance that she had in that 2012 article, that increasing scrutiny and verifying their trades should be done to make sure no inside information was used.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Retire? Oh you're funny.

    She is 100% planning on dying in office. She's obviously one those people who are obsessed with leaving a "legacy". In her mind she's going to be remember as the first female member of the House and a groundbreaking feminist who made way for others, etc.

    Which would have probably stuck if she'd retired a decade ago. Now she's going to remembered as a greedy ghoul who intentionally sabotaged other politicians and held back society to enrich herself. This is too little, too late.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    she doesn’t care now

    She still cares and if this had a chance to pass shed vote against it

    We'll see neoliberals claim to want progressive policy now, because they'll never have to vote on it.

    The same way Republicans spent four years demanding Epstein lists, and now that they can release them they won't.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 40 points 1 year ago

    Cool. Also, fuck Nacy Pelosi.

  • source
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That's like Trump saying they should ban pedophilia now that he can't get it up anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 31 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    lol, she already made her money. I agree with removing it, but that’s a very boomer way of seeing…. “I’ve got mine, so fuck you”.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    By saying she supports it, she knows trump will block it

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Twist: It is actually a total ban on all stock trading thus eliminating stock markets forever.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    She blocked it when it had a chance of passing. Of course she supports it now that she knows it won't

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    She's fucking 85. It's not like it will fuck up her retirement plan or something.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    That's probably the only way to move things forward though. Implement rules that only affect future politicians. Let the current generation have their cake. We can gradually transition to something more sane as they get replaced.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    Well, there goes the Nancy ETF.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The fix is in then. We know this greedy inside trader doesn't want that.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)
    [+] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    It's cynical, dishonest, manipulative, and completely unproductive.

    Based on that alone I completely believe that Nancy Pelosi did the math and realized that Democrats could argue for this out loud maybe even vote for it but there's no chance that it'll ever happen so it's a great chance for her to actually do politics with the voters which I thought she had considered beneath her.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Make it retroactive to Trumps first term and see how much she supports it.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    She's really good at stocks though.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Hey, she already got her millions, so who cares. In fact, she's a hero for supporting this legislation that would have prevented her insider-trading husband from accumulating so much wealth had it been in place when she took office. Let's throw her a parade.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    To everyone here dismissing this and saying “too little too late..”

    What are republicans doing or saying that comes even close to this?

    Like sure this is bullshit, but can anyone say when republicans even came close to the lowest fake ass shit you’d pretend this to be ?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    Dang. I was already up 30% by mirroring her portfolio. Now we'll have to play fair again if we cant know her trades.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Trump Says He Doesn’t Really Know About It

    I feel like this is a big list.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    I don't trust these kinds of bills because voters don't know enough to have a say.

    Politicians will announce policy MONTHS in advance. People don't care because CNN or whatever didn't make it consumable. And then politicians make moves on the stock market. And then people accuse them of insider trading.

    The last few times Pelosi has went viral, the policies were hashed out ad nauseum and even made headlines well in advance. Way before she made her moves.

    People have no idea what's going on and then a bill like this appears?

    Edit: the amount of people who take this further is rare. It's all about "insider trading." But what about the things they actually do to profit off governance?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    This can only mean one thing.... The market is about to tank and tank hard as fuch.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›