robosmith Posted January 27, 2023 Report Posted January 27, 2023 1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said: I could give you a better answer than the silly one you gave me to where did Nancy's money come from. "She made it before the 2012 stock act" did she? Don't be ridiculous. Yes, the story of insider trading from WCM that I QUOTED was from 2007. Duh. 1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said: So what do they want from this new bill that they didn't get from the stock act of 2012. Actionable results preventing stuff like this: https://freebeacon.com/democrats/convenient-timing-pelosi-sold-3-million-of-google-stock-weeks-before-doj-launched-antitrust-probe/ So where is the EVIDENCE that Nancy told Paul about a "DoJ investigation" of google? You know they don't just tell everyone in government about investigations, don't you? Quote
Infidel Dog Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 (edited) Where's the evidence saying it's just a coincidence that Paul knows precisely when to buy and sell and it always coincidentally lines up with something like a coming cancellation of subsidies or an upcoming investigation? You're always asking for evidence, Evidence boy? You're never offering any. Edited January 28, 2023 by Infidel Dog Quote
Infidel Dog Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 17 hours ago, robosmith said: In 2007 that was NOT illegal. "The Stock Act" passed almost unanimously and signed by Obama made it illegal in 2012. As I understand it the difference between the stock act and Josh Hawley's act is the Stock act pretty much just told congress insider trading was naughty and they shouldn't do that. Josh Hawley's act says flat out they can't trade stocks. Quote
robosmith Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 31 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said: Where's the evidence saying it's just a coincidence that Paul knows precisely when to buy and sell and it always coincidentally lines up with something like a coming cancellation of subsidies or an upcoming investigation? You're always asking for evidence, Evidence boy? You're never offering any. YOU'RE LYING AGAIN. I posted the Jan 6th Committee SWORN TESTIMONY FOR THE SECOND TIME, the LAST time you accused me of "not offering any." If you won't read my evidence DON'T DARE ACCUSE ME of not offering any. "Always"? LMAO. Prove it. Quote
robosmith Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 14 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said: As I understand it the difference between the stock act and Josh Hawley's act is the Stock act pretty much just told congress insider trading was naughty and they shouldn't do that. Josh Hawley's act says flat out they can't trade stocks. It wasn't JUST "naughty," it made it ILLEGAL. Does that not mean ANYTHING to YOU? Quote
Nationalist Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 2 hours ago, robosmith said: Yes, the story of insider trading from WCM that I QUOTED was from 2007. Duh. So where is the EVIDENCE that Nancy told Paul about a "DoJ investigation" of google? You know they don't just tell everyone in government about investigations, don't you? Lol...this wins the groovy guy of the day award for pure innocence. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
robosmith Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 1 minute ago, Nationalist said: Lol...this wins the groovy guy of the day award for pure innocence. IOW, YOU have NO ANSWERS for the QUESTIONS. Why do you even bother to post ^this BULLSHIT? Quote
Nationalist Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 10 hours ago, robosmith said: IOW, YOU have NO ANSWERS for the QUESTIONS. Why do you even bother to post ^this BULLSHIT? Robo-bot...when an investigation is going on...they all know. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Deluge Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 (edited) On 1/27/2023 at 10:45 AM, robosmith said: Why would she be "thrown in prison"? Can you even cite a law? How about insider trading? It'd be sweet if she got nailed for that. lol Either way, I want the btch out. She needs to retire. Edited January 28, 2023 by Deluge Quote
Deluge Posted January 28, 2023 Report Posted January 28, 2023 (edited) On 1/27/2023 at 10:44 AM, robosmith said: Laws lay down requirements. The details are in the regulations to IMPLEMENT those requirements and are not written until AFTER the law is passed. There are OFTEN multiple ways REQUIREMETS can be IMPLEMENTED. ? Show me where that is written, and how Pelosi's comment is supported by it. All I've seen is leftist a-holes trying to justify what she said - perhaps they should meet with you and get some official guidance? lol Edited January 28, 2023 by Deluge Quote
robosmith Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 18 hours ago, Nationalist said: Robo-bot...when an investigation is going on...they all know. How would YOU know that? You're not even American. Most likely you're just making up BULLSHIT, because you're an ADMITTED TROLL. Quote
robosmith Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 10 hours ago, Deluge said: How about insider trading? It'd be sweet if she got nailed for that. lol Before 2012 it wasn't illegal. And many in Congress were doing it. 10 hours ago, Deluge said: Either way, I want the btch out. She needs to retire. Who cares what you want? Maybe you're just anti-democratic like all the fascists in Trump's cult. ? Pelosi's constituents will decide when she needs to retire; certainly NOT YOU. LMAO Quote
robosmith Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 10 hours ago, Deluge said: Show me where that is written, and how Pelosi's comment is supported by it. All I've seen is leftist a-holes trying to justify what she said - perhaps they should meet with you and get some official guidance? lol It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE among legislators and people familiar with the process of legislation. MAYBE some day YOU will catch on. Until then, you'll just have to continue to wallow in YOUR IGNORANCE. LMAO I'll admit that it was not very smart of Pelosi to go into the weeds publicly like that, because it just confuses the heck out of people LIKE YOU. Quote
Nationalist Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 5 hours ago, robosmith said: How would YOU know that? You're not even American. Most likely you're just making up BULLSHIT, because you're an ADMITTED TROLL. Lol...yes dear...lol. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
Deluge Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, robosmith said: It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE among legislators and people familiar with the process of legislation. MAYBE some day YOU will catch on. Until then, you'll just have to continue to wallow in YOUR IGNORANCE. LMAO I'll admit that it was not very smart of Pelosi to go into the weeds publicly like that, because it just confuses the heck out of people LIKE YOU. Show me where it's "COMMON KNOWLEDGE". lol I get that you think it is, but I really don't give a sht what you think, so you're going to have to come up with more than just your opinion. Do you think you can do that? Once again, all I've seen are half-a$$ed explanations for why she said that. There's been zero proof given that she was simply following correct procedure. You're going to need more evidence. Edited January 29, 2023 by Deluge Quote
Deluge Posted January 29, 2023 Report Posted January 29, 2023 7 hours ago, robosmith said: Before 2012 it wasn't illegal. And many in Congress were doing it. Who cares what you want? Maybe you're just anti-democratic like all the fascists in Trump's cult. ? Pelosi's constituents will decide when she needs to retire; certainly NOT YOU. LMAO Who said anything about Insider Trading before 2012? Show me where 2012 is relevant to 2023. No one cares what YOU want, and that is the more relevant point. There's only one cult in Western Society, and it's not Trump Supporters or Conservatives in general. Can you guess who these douchebag degenerates are? Pelosi's constituents are also pervert degenerates. It's a pandemic of corruption on that side of the political fence. Quote
reason10 Posted February 1, 2023 Author Report Posted February 1, 2023 On 1/27/2023 at 8:12 PM, robosmith said: It wasn't JUST "naughty," it made it ILLEGAL. Does that not mean ANYTHING to YOU? Illegal apparently doesn't mean anything to you when a liberal Democrat commits a crime. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.