Crime Mike Johnson argues Congress trades stocks so they can feed their families

Berserker13 said:
republicans-are-the-aged-like-milk-final-boss-v0-e1l0awz5m81f1.jpg
Click to expand...
Time to get back into #TrumpPuts. I thought this run would last until June which is when we should see some empty shelves. Looks like I was a couple weeks off.
Glad I got back in oil 2 weeks ago. Oil companies were keeping prices by drilling but if 100 years of history will show you the oil companies won’t keep the prices down for more than a couple months unless it’s something beyond their control like COVID or some country flooding the market to pay for a war.
 
NoSmilez said:
I know it is and if you read it then you know you are wrong. The limit is 200 dollars per person. You are suggesting a industrywide conspiracy to donate?
Click to expand...

And scum bags like sanders work around this by just having their big pharma donors give under $200 over and over and over again

abcnews.go.com

Bernie Sanders accepted pharma executives' donations prior to new pledge

Sen. Bernie Sanders is calling on presidential candidates to renounce such contributions from the health care and pharmaceutical industry.
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com
 
NoSmilez said:
So how many individuals? Think about it for a second. You really have no idea what you are talking about here.
Click to expand...

You're the only claiming Bernie doesn't take money from big pharma when it's public record that he does.
 
ColemanwastheGOAT said:
You're the only claiming Bernie doesn't take money from big pharma when it's public record that he does.
Click to expand...
You are being a boomer. You are still going on this when you are proven wrong.

First of all you made this statement of payouts regarding campaign contributions. Do you understand that candidates don't keep donations? They have to list every spending and track any leftovers.

You also made up some bullshit about same people making thousands of small contributions. If same people made multiple contributions then it gets logged when it passes the limit. You can check fec.gov to see the stats for yourself. You also posted some article from 2019 that you didn't read when you made that silly statement.
 
Last edited:
NoSmilez said:
You are being a boomer. You are still going on this when you are proven wrong.

First of all you made this statement of payouts regarding campaign contributions. Do you understand that candidates don't keep donations? They have to list every spending and track any leftovers.

You also made up some bullshit about same people making thousands of small contributions. If same people made multiple contributions then it gets logged when it passes the limit. You can check fec.gov to see the stats for yourself. You also posted some article from 2019 that you didn't read when you made that silly statement.
Click to expand...

I posted sources
 
Crazy Source said:
OK, but this is the Republican SOTH saying this dumb shit, not a DEM. The same party angling to make massive cuts to Medicare to pay for massive tax cuts. GTFO with your both-sides deflection.
Click to expand...

But both sides do get extremely rich doing this. They should either not be allowed to trade stocks or they should be capped at certain level of earnings. It’s amazing how much they can make trading stocks when no one else without the information they have can’t make that much. We have a stock broker and we don’t make much from it. Both sides are corrupt as shit. I am quite sick of people trying to force you to take a side in this circus and the hate seems to be coming from the left more than the right. @Islam Imamate always cries when I “both sides” it
 
nhbbear said:
But both sides do get extremely rich doing this. They should either not be allowed to trade stocks or they should be capped at certain level of earnings. Both sides are corrupt as shit. I am quite sick of people trying to force you to take a side in this circus and the hate seems to be coming from the left more than the right. @Islam Imamate always cries when I “both sides” it
Click to expand...
To be clear here you're the one who tagged me just to whine about "both sides" again.
 
nhbbear said:
You’re the one that quotes me when I “both sides” it and seems to hate it so much
Click to expand...
Yeah because it's a lazy analysis that gets way too much credence when it's usually not true.

To be clear I'm not saying Dems are always better. If you analyzed every state and local level Dem and GOP party you'd likely find that in some blue states there is significantly more corruption on the Dem side. And at the national level there's the likes of Bob Menendez.

But right now the greatest corruption by far is coming from the Trump regime. The crypto rugpulls, the strong arming of law firms for pro bono work, the Qatari jet, the intimidation of news networks to extract settlements over dubious lawsuits, it's unprecedented.

Personally I think the insidet trading accusation against Congress strikes more as populist red meat than fact. Johnson sounds wildly out of touch here and while I don't respect him as a politician I have no reason to think he's engaging in criminal behavior.
 
How would Mike know, I thought he claimed to not have a bank account
 
Islam Imamate said:
Yeah because it's a lazy analysis that gets way too much credence when it's usually not true.

To be clear I'm not saying Dems are always better. If you analyzed every state and local level Dem and GOP party you'd likely find that in some blue states there is significantly more corruption on the Dem side. And at the national level there's the likes of Bob Menendez.

But right now the greatest corruption by far is coming from the Trump regime. The crypto rugpulls, the strong arming of law firms for pro bono work, the Qatari jet, the intimidation of news networks to extract settlements over dubious lawsuits, it's unprecedented.

Personally I think the insidet trading accusation against Congress strikes more as populist red meat than fact. Johnson sounds wildly out of touch here and while I don't respect him as a politician I have no reason to think he's engaging in criminal behavior.
Click to expand...

It’s not lazy if that’s how you feel. I look at both sides and what I see bothers me. And the wealthiest members of congress are usually 1 &2 republicans and then some dems and then reps and so on. They weren’t that wealthy when they were elected. And as much as I hate aoc, she seems to be one against the trading so I kind of like her for that
 
44nutman said:
www.latintimes.com

Mike Johnson Argues Congress Needs Stock Trading to 'Support Their Families' Due to 'Frozen' Salaries

House Speaker Mike Johnson defended stock trading as a necessary income boost that allows members of Congress to "take care of their family."
www.latintimes.com www.latintimes.com
Senator Tubberville has bought stock in not one but 2 companies right before they got government contracts. I bet his kids can super size their McDonalds meal.
How can Congress survive on 100k+ salary, free healthcare and lifetime pension without using insider information to keep clothes on the backs of their children. Congress like Wu Tang is for the children.
Mike Johnson is right if we don’t allow Congress to trade stock we won’t get the same quality of people in Congress we have right now.
Cliffs: Congress stock trading feeds kids and attracts quality people.
Click to expand...

Edit: Someone kindly pointed out to me in a DM that I mistakenly referred to the source of the article in the OP as the LA Times, when really it is the Latin Times (a much smaller paper of relative insignificance). Stupid mistake on my part. I am going through my posts to make the corrections now, to eliminate the unintentional slander against the LA Times, but didn't want to just memory hole it without acknowledging my error. The post below has been otherwise unaltered.

I mean... this is a pretty blatant misrepresentation of what went down here. Not on your part, because you are simply going on what is written in the article.

Johnson was speaking out in favour of a stock trading ban and posed this as the "counter argument."

Then the Latin Times took the words he used to present the hypothetical counter argument and presented it as his own broader perspective that he's laying out in opposition to the ban.

He did express some sympathy with the idea that if the pay is continuously going down (I don't know that it is, but that's his claim), then some people are going to want to trade stocks to supplement. But he also clearly stated that he feels the privilege is abused and all things considered he is in favour of the ban.

I'm not taking a political side in this. It's just a really dirty thing the Latin Times did here, and pretty Fox Newsie if you ask me.

Anyway, here's his full response, in his own words, when asked if he supported a stock trading ban:

 
Last edited:
Crazy Source said:
OK, but this is the Republican SOTH saying this dumb shit, not a DEM. The same party angling to make massive cuts to Medicare to pay for massive tax cuts. GTFO with your both-sides deflection.
Click to expand...

Except it's taken completely out of context and he actually expressed clear support for the stock trading ban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,267,147
Messages
57,452,581
Members
175,717
Latest member
Angell

Share this page

Back
Top