Normally I report on partisan reporting, which is basically all reporting these days. But in a rare moment of seemingly non-partisan reporting on the part of many different organizations including Conservative Brief (wow), this was actually pretty unbiased outside of the catchphrase that they used in order to get people to read it.
It say "Nancy Pelosi may flee the country!"
src
The headline being deceptive and the story twisting around to be about something that has nothing to do with proving or even stating anything to back up what the headline says was still true though, and this, as well as the fact that their big closer is to point out that 61% of the members of Congress own stocks.... as if this was meant to be at all shocking to anyone that is reading it.
I own stocks, you likely own stocks, virtually every successful person I have ever met has owned stocks. Is this really meant to be shocking that the people who managed to finagle their way into the highest offices that the United States has also own stocks?
I'm just kind of surprised that it is ONLY 61% but then again, this is the MSM we are talking about so they probably just pulled some number out of the sky and based that information on nothing.
In one of the articles in question, the article stars out talking about how Elon is planning on investigating members of Congress for accepting payments from organizations that received money from USAID in the form of transfers or other things that would obviously be a crime.
The suspicion here is that these grants were made to various NGOs and then once the money is there, the US Government no longer has any control over it and then some of that money could make its way back into the bank accounts of the people who would have been in charge of making that sort of frivolous spending possible. Obviously, anyone caught doing that would be in very serious trouble and perhaps that is why there is so much pushback against DOGE. I seriously doubt that anyone is ever going to take the fall for this though and despite what the text said in the clickbait link that lead me to the article in the first place, no, Nancy Pelosi is not going to flee the country.
Even if they caught her red-handed she wouldn't flee and she is not going to get caught either. She an other established politicians are too well-connected to ever get in trouble for anything.
The articles also manage to transition away from talking about USAID and its connection to congress and then try to make a very weak and unsubstantiated correlation between USAID and the stock market. In particular, they were trying to make a connection between certain Congresspeople and insider trading, as if that had anything to do with Doge or USAID.
The connection they attempt to make between Elon Musk and investigating insider trading is a complete lie and there is no part of the article that even suggests that Elon is involved in such. However, I think they are putting the two things inside the same article so that people will somehow walk away from this article (and many others like it) with a feeling that Doge is going to investigate Congress' personal stock portfolios, which they are not.
Deceptive reporting is everywhere and I hope that people are smart enough to realize that basically all of it is lies.
The purpose of this article is two-fold: To make people think that DOGE is going to go after particular people in Congress, which they are not and also to attempt to make some sort of connection between certain members of Congress and insider trading which is something that almost certainly happens but as of yet there is no solid evidence that this is the case and there likely never will be.
It's a nothing-story but I guess it was kind of nice to see that articles written by obviously biased publications did mention that both R's and D's have become suspiciously wealthy during their time in office.
Sounds like many an article I have read, or skimmed really. I can't tolerate them!
That said, I have exactly zero dollars invested in stocks. Once upon a time I did. When I really needed it, which was at the same time a great many of us needed it, it wasn't there. Also, no matter how I tried to find mutual funds that invested along my lines of interest, a year or two later I would find lots of stuff I couldn't condone in my protfolio, such as war and medical stocks. I don't have the interest to research individual companies for myself.
fair enough, I don't research individual stocks anymore either and feel like this research is difficult to get real information on because just like with everything else, the media is in on the scamming of the common man when it comes to valuation and especially hype. It's kind of like that one finance guy that works for CNN or something that is always pushing certain financial advice and so many times, most of the time, what he says to do is wrong. Think about it though: If some rich folks out there really wanted to rip off the general public legally, they could just hype some particular stock and then quietly sell their own shares. It happened with Tyco.
It probably happened with the Trump tariff turnaround. I'm out. I don't want to have anything to do with government influenced investments, they are too risky.
I'm not going to argue with that. I do enjoy how the MSM kind of abandoned their constant talk about how Crypto is a ponzi-scheme though. all their attempts to blackball that choice by the people has failed. Now they decide to only talk about it when it is going down, which is fine. Myself and anyone else I know that is involved in crypto don't give a damn what the MSM has to say about it
I find what they say about it amusing. It highlights that nearly everything they tell us is designed to fool us in some way, if not downright out and out lies.
and the stock market is one big ponzi scheme, so what's the difference?