Connect with us


Pelosi Dismisses Questions On Congressmembers Violating STOCK Act



On Wednesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed questions about a new Business Insider report that found dozens of Congressmembers had violated the 2012 Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act (STOCK Act), and argued that Congressmembers who are able to affect the rules of the economy should be allowed to trade stock because “we are a free-market economy.”

“Madam Speaker, Insider just completed a five‑month investigation finding that 49 Members of Congress and 182 senior Congressional staffers have violated the STOCK Act, the insider trading law,” a reporter said. “I’m wondering if you have any reaction to that.”

“And secondly, should Members of Congress and their spouses be banned from trading individual stocks while serving in Congress?” the reporter asked.

“No, I don’t – no, to the second one. Any – we have a responsibility to report in the stock – on the stock,” Pelosi responded. “But I don’t – I’m not familiar with that five month review, but if the people aren’t reporting, they should be.”

“Why shouldn’t they be banned?” the reporter asked.

“Because this is a free market and people – we are a free market economy,” Pelosi responded. “They should be able to participate in that.”

This week, Business Insider released a report stating that 49 Members of Congress had violated the STOCK Act. According to the report, those who violate the Act “are supposed to pay a late fee of $200 the first time. Increasingly higher fines follow if they continue to be late — potentially costing tens of thousands of dollars in extreme cases.”

However, “No public records exist indicating whether these officials ever paid the fines. Congressional ethics staff wouldn’t confirm the existence of nonpublic ledgers tracking how many officials paid fines for violating the STOCK Act. And 19 lawmakers wouldn’t answer questions from Insider about whether they’d paid a penalty. Ten other lawmakers said they’d paid their fines, but they declined to provide proof, such as a receipt or canceled check,” the report said.

A senior congressional aide who requested anonymity told Business Insider that enforcement of the STOCK Act in the House of Representatives relied entirely on “the honor system.”

Business Insider said the aide “confirmed that members did not get notifications when they were late. Instead, they explained, each member office was expected to figure out not only whether they were late but also how to pay the late fee.”

According to Business Insider, in the Senate, “staffers who file their disclosures late receive an email from the lawmaker-led Senate Select Committee on Ethics telling them to pay the late fee or to apply for a waiver, according to a copy of such an email reviewed by Insider and interviews with staffers. The Senate Ethics Committee didn’t respond to questions about how often this happens, how closely staff monitor filings, or whether senators also receive emailed notifications.”

Continue Reading


  1. willyb

    December 16, 2021 at 9:27 am

    Pelosi has been guilty of this forever. She even altered bills to make them favorable to her husband’s business. Insider trading laws should be updated to include anyone serving in congress OR working for someone serving in congress.

  2. Dexter Wilson

    December 16, 2021 at 1:12 pm

    They had passed a law that required that elected officials could not use their position to take advantage of knowledge of future events such as if they knew a highway might be built and buying property along its path. She had legislation concerning credit cards and failed to bring the issue to a vote and at the same time knowing this bought stock in the company involved. That my friend was a federal law she seemingly cheated and she should have been prosecuted for by the DOJ and they did nothing. It seems that if you are a democrat you can’t be prosecuted. Durham don’t wait and go ahead and prosecute Hillary concerning her involvement in the Trump lie.

  3. Gregory Burnett

    December 17, 2021 at 9:34 am

    Unbelievable, once again congress violates the law to get rich, there should be laws in place that nobody involved in the government could do that and if they do don’t slap their wrists

  4. Alan

    December 19, 2021 at 7:01 am

    She owns stock in google and the vaccine companies. So do a lot of other politicians. They also like fauci own stock indirectly through other corporations who own stock in the vaccine companies. And you have to wonder why they are pushing vaccines that do not stop the spread of the virus. nor do they protect you from contracting the virus. Look at all the money they are basically steeling from the tax payers. 100’s of billions. The nuremberg law was put into place after a government that hitler was involved in committed genocide. These people are in violation of the law as we speak. I would think that most people can see it. They are breaking their own laws yet expect us to follow the law. These people need to go to prison for crimes on humanity, Fraud, and using their official capacity to protect themselves from the crimes they are committing against humanity and the people of this country. As they took down other countries leaders for the same thing they are doing now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


National Public Radio Discontinues Reading the Declaration of Inependence



Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

A post by Todd Starnes alerts that National Public Radio (NPR) has ditched its annual ritual of reading the Declaration of Independence. NPR, derisively referred to by Starnes as “National Public Welfare Radio,” announced the cessation of reading the Declaration. Which staffers at the taxpayer-funded radio network had been reading aloud the document since 1988.

The void that would have resulted from not reading the Declaration was not unfilled. “Instead, NPR broadcast an 11-minute conversation about whether or not the Founding Fathers actually meant the words “all men are created equal.” Here’s a link if you’d like to listen to their “screed” (which also reminds us frequently that many of the Founding Fathers owned slaves).

Starnes disclosed that he owns “KWAM, the leading news talk radio station in Memphis, Tennessee. It angers me that my tax dollars are used to prop up a broadcast competitor that spits on our Founding Fathers and our Founding Documents.”

Interestingly, NPR’s newly voiced contempt and cynicism for the Declaration of Independence does not encompass refusing taxpayer-funded government support. Whether or not the Founding Fathers meant what they said and what they wrote may be grist for energetic banter on a radio program that is increasingly committed to shrill progressive virtue signaling. However, the topic of this discussion among smug well-remunerated media activists is irrelevant. The words of the Founding Fathers have been inspirational for two hundred and forty-six years and have been the moral and legal foundation used to free the slaves and develop Constitutional principles to ensure that slavery can never be implemented in this country. Slavery currently exists in several countries now, but NPR is dedicated to ignoring that scourge.

Continue Reading


‘Every Word Of This Is False’: Ted Cruz Factchecks Ilhan Omar’s Attack On Coach Kennedy Prayer Case



Rep. Ilhan Omar

On Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) factchecked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) after she made multiple false claims about the Supreme Court ruling in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court ruled 6-3 that a public high school football coach in Washington state had his First Amendment rights violated when he was punished by his school district for praying on the field after games where students could see.

As previously reported, “In 2008, high school football coach Joseph Kennedy began a tradition of praying at midfield after each game. Over time, his players and even members of the opposing team began to join him. In September 2015, a school administrator addressed the matter with Kennedy after an opposing team complained and the coach briefly stopped his prayers.”

“On October 14, 2015, Kennedy told the school district that he was planning on resuming his prayer tradition at the next game. The school district told the coach that his prayers violated the district’s policy, but Kennedy continued to pray at the next two games. The school district subsequently placed him on administrative leave, banned him from participating in the football program, and refused to renew his contract for the following season. Kennedy took the issue to federal district court, arguing that the school district had violated his First Amendment rights,” the report added.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Kennedy, Omar tweeted, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

“Every word of this is false,” Cruz responded.

Omar’s claim that the Supreme Court’s decision allowed to teachers to “pressure students to join prayer” is false. The Court’s ruling just protected Coach Kennedy’s religious freedom to pray publicly.

Omar was also incorrect in claiming that there would be retaliation against students who did not join Kennedy in prayer – the coach’s tradition of praying after games began with him praying alone at midfield after football games. Kennedy’s school district even noted that Kennedy had “not actively encouraged, or required, participation.”

Additionally, in contrast to Omar’s claim that “religious freedom is dead in America,” the Supreme Court ruling actually strengthened protections of religious freedom.

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch explained, “Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head.”

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch added. “And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List