Chris Josephs exposes how Nancy Pelosi’s net worth ballooned from $20M to $260M via insider trades—like Tesla LEAPs and NVIDIA (140% return on $5M)—while her app, Pelosi Stock Tracker, lets users replicate these moves, generating $30M in profits since 2021. Richard Burr’s $1.65M COVID stock dump days after downplaying the pandemic and Dan Crenshaw’s Meta profits amid TikTok bans highlight systemic corruption, with the Stock Act’s weak enforcement enabling conflicts like Mark Wayne Mullen’s defense contractor holdings on the Armed Services Committee. Josephs argues blind trusts or index funds could restore trust, but politicians’ war-stock portfolios—Lockheed, Raytheon—and delayed disclosures deepen public distrust, proving insider trading isn’t just illegal but a threat to democracy itself. [Automatically generated summary]
At 25, would I say that, you know, looking five years from then, I'll be running a Pelosi Stock Tracker, building an app with the slogan, invest like a politician, having that thing become a thing.
No, I don't think I would have ever gotten to that.
So at 25, I was actually living in Bali.
I quit my New York City job when I was doing finance, and I started working on my family company where we would sell sports compression products, like little ones with numbers on them, custom ones that you would get for your kid for peewee football.
And I was so sick of the finance grind in New York that I was like, I'm going to work on this family thing.
I'm going to try and take it up to another level.
I'll go travel around, move to Bali, was working out there for probably like six or seven months, moved back to...
Boston is where I'm from.
Then went up to New Hampshire, became a snowboard instructor.
Was working on the ski slopes.
There's a whole story behind it.
Was working on the ski slopes as a snowboard instructor.
And then when COVID hit, moved back in with my family.
And then that's how I connected with my co-founders, Brian, Aaron, and Scott.
They're out in LA. And there's a whole story on how I essentially connected with them, which we can get into.
But we started building an app together.
And long story short, I'm sure we'll get into the majority of this stuff.
We essentially built out on a tech side, the first way to follow your friends' stock portfolios.
So if you had a Robinhood and I had a Webull or a Fidelity, we would connect it to our app and you can get push notifications of when a trade would happen.
I was the co-founder of it and I was in charge of the growth.
And one obvious way to do it, this was during the GameStop era, was let me build a Nancy Pelosi portfolio.
I'm seeing on Twitter, I'm seeing on TikTok, I'm seeing on Instagram politicians crushing it.
Them getting called out for their trades, especially during COVID. I never will forget it.
He is the one that would essentially call them out at the beginning.
He started the Pelosi tracker.
In a way, he was calling out the politician stuff, and then the Pelosi tracker came probably in 2022, but he started in 2020. And I think Richard Burr, that whole story, started because unusual, started calling it out.
The story behind the Richard Burr is around his COVID trades, and it was a full-on scandal.
You covered it at Fox News.
The story is, on February 7th, 2020, he wrote an op-ed with another senator saying, hey, Americans, don't worry.
COVID's not that bad.
We're keeping an eye on it.
Everything will be okay.
While he has and writes that op-ed, he's getting insider kind of details because he sat as the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee while he was writing that op-ed.
So while sitting as the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he's getting private meetings saying, hey guys, COVID's actually way worse than we think.
This is not going to end the same way that people expect.
The retirement account is something you don't touch.
Those are the simply buy and hold, never touch them forever.
But selling off that to that degree is extreme.
And I think is what caught a lot of people's attention of like, you don't just do that.
You don't just do that while you're the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
But to make this, this is why I get passionate about.
It's like, I'm not even a political guy.
I'll tell you the whole story of how this started.
I didn't grow up being obsessed with politics.
I just, citizen journalists kind of see the opportunity and be like, this is fucked up.
We should stop this.
The story, though, then goes, February 13th, he sells off $1.65 million.
30 minutes later, he calls his brother-in-law.
And him and his brother-in-law have around a two-minute conversation.
The brother-in-law hangs up the phone.
He calls his financial advisor.
His financial advisor doesn't pick up.
He then calls his second financial advisor.
They pick up.
They have around a 30-second conversation.
He then goes off and sells off $265,000 of his own portfolio.
So now you got the senator, who's the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, calling up his brother-in-law, them having a conversation, and then the brother-in-law going and selling off 30 seconds after that conversation.
So I was raised during the height of empire, our Victorian era, and you were raised in the decline of empire, sort of the post-World War era.
So totally different perspective.
So you're much better situated to understand what's going on, to see it clearly, to not lie to yourself about it.
That's crazy.
So Burr...
Just to let you know, since I'm from D.C., I don't think the head of the Senate Intel Committee can ever be charged with a crime because he knows too much.
This is going on, that there's corruption, that politicians are supposed to be protecting and serving the country or actually using this information to their own advantage while the country rots.
How did you discover that Pelosi, then Speaker of the House, was particularly successful?
When she got married to Paula, they were worth around $20 million, their net worth.
Their net worth now is around $260 million.
So you're 10X-ing that.
How?
She's been a career-long politician, making $175K. Her husband's very successful in stocks, particularly tech stocks.
It all started with her in 2020 when she bought Tesla.
And this is when I personally started paying attention.
And then you look back and it's like, holy shit, this has been going on forever.
And that actually started back in with the Visa IPO. So with the Visa IPO, she and her husband were able to get privileged ways to buy in on the IPO. No one knows how, no one knows why.
And then the stock absolutely crushed it.
That was brought up on a 60 Minutes interview.
And that was that iconic interview from the reporter asking her, like, do you think this should be allowed?
Is this fine that you got in on the visa?
And then, you know, this is 10, 12 years ago.
Nothing necessarily happened.
Again, 2020 comes around, COVID. So people already necessarily know about her.
She now starts trading stocks again.
Getting blown up on social media because while everyone's with COVID, what are they doing?
They're on social media and they're trading stocks.
So now everyone's acutely watching these things and paying attention.
She, in end of 2020, right after Biden got elected, she went and bought up to $5 million of Tesla calls.
And I can go on forever about the details of these things.
She's not just buying stock.
Well, her husband's not just buying.
She's buying these things called leaps.
And what a leap is, is an options contract that allows you to buy a stock and be bullish on a stock at a much cheaper cost basis.
So instead of you needing $5 million to buy X amount of quote-unquote risk in a stock for it to go up, you can actually take that $5 million and buy a leap and it gives you a broader delta so that you can make more money.
Essentially higher risk, higher reward.
So she goes and she's buying these leaps.
She's not just buying the stocks in them.
She buys leaps in Tesla at the end of 2020, right after Biden got elected.
2021 comes around, or excuse me, 2019 into 2020, because that was when Biden started.
Part of that bill had tons of not only subsidies for the electric vehicle industry, but also money to build out and invest for the charging ports for electric vehicles.
Because, you know, you can't just tell people to go buy electric cars.
You need to have the infrastructure.
So when you start following the timeline on it, it's like, okay, Biden gets elected.
She buys up to $5 million of LEAPs, which are very risky, in Tesla.
Agenda then comes out.
The stock flies 50%.
So it's not like she's actually buying things that the public wouldn't necessarily know about, but she's buying things in a high-risky way with a ton of money in ways that the public now is paying attention to because everyone's trading stocks and they're watching Tesla, Elon.
That was when the thing started blowing up.
And that was the first trade that probably, I think, re-triggered everyone's mind into like, Wait a second, you know, this may not be the sketchiest trade in the world because those things were still public, but how are they allowed to necessarily do that?
How is Pelosi, the third most powerful person in America, you know, President, VP, the House, the head of- Speaker.
Speaker, yep.
They shouldn't be allowed to trade stocks.
How is this even, like, how are we allowing that?
And I think, like, the culmination of those different intersections is why this started getting big and why- People started paying attention, specifically to Pelosi.
They're essentially the most popular stock and the best company.
I think they're worth more than Apple now.
They're the most valuable company in the world.
They sell the chips for semis.
And they have a whole broader thing beyond just that.
But essentially, they're a semiconductor company.
They buy and sell chips.
So, in 2022...
That's when the CHIPS Act, if you remember this $54 billion CHIPS bill that Biden and Pelosi pushed, she bought, and this is where social media, again, why it's powerful, and the pressure started building up to her at this point because people were following the trades, the markets were crushing it, she was crushing it in 2021. When 2022 came around, the CHIPS Act comes out, $54 billion of infrastructure for CHIPS and subsidies for them.
She bought NVIDIA, I think, a couple months before that.
The problem with her is every trade is suspicious.
There's never a trade that you just are like, okay, you know, I could not.
And I'll get into them without...
There's a couple more I can get to.
But with that NVIDIA trade in particular, she bought it.
The Chips Act comes out.
We start making TikToks.
We start tweeting about it.
And then everyone's like, what the fuck?
What's going on with that?
She then sells it.
For a loss.
Because the stock was already coming down.
This was when the market started falling.
And she ended up selling it for a $300,000 loss.
She sold it all.
Because I think the public was starting to be like, what the fuck?
How are you doing this when we're already calling you out and you're still continuing to do it?
She sold those things for a $300k loss.
And then she sold her shares for a $200k loss.
So she lost money on that first NVIDIA time.
But the interesting thing about that is...
Per these filings, the way that the filings work is the Stock Act requires politicians to disclose them, their spouses, and their dependents of any trade up to 45 days.
On that trade in particular is the only time she's ever publicly said her profit and loss.
So never before, never since then, only in that filing was when she said, hey everyone.
I lost $250k in NVIDIA, get off my back kind of thing.
She's never done that for when she's profited.
She's only done it when she's lost.
Interesting.
There's so many things with her.
The filings she sends out are always before holidays.
She's notorious in our community for releasing reports around Thanksgiving, July 4th, Christmas.
I think...
The argument is because if you put it on December 23rd, everyone's going off to vacation.
But yeah, we've been tracking her since 2021. Funny how, you know, you look at, if I looked at the Congress, who are the filthiest members of Congress?
Well, Dan Crenshaw would be right at the top with Pelosi.
The funny thing, I was talking about this yesterday with a buddy of mine who's in business, but you often see retired politicians decide they're going to go get rich in business, in finance usually, but in some form of PE or whatever that they think they're going to be, and they are all terrible.
We're talking about Pompeo thinks he's going to get rich.
And she honestly is one of the five or six that I personally track that I know a decent amount about because of how many times she has conflicts of interest with what she trades.
For example, she bought this company called Viasat.
And what Viasat does is they're a military contractor.
They're like a Starlink, like Elon's thing.
But they do the communications for the military.
They get hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts from, you know, this or that.
She sits on the committee that oversees military construction.
And it's like, I'm watching you trade this stock, you know, even aside from performance.
I'm watching you buy and sell a military construction company while sitting on a committee that oversees military construction.
How is that allowed?
I don't know.
Another one was she bought a mining company called Helka Mining with ticker symbol HL. That stock has been fluctuating here and there and I think she is up around 15% on it.
She sits on one of the energy resources committees and it's like...
His stocks, the one that in particular that really frustrated me about him was Meta.
So, the stocks that he's buying, his portfolio is comprised of Meta, which he's crushing it, up like 200%.
He bought the dip perfectly back in 2022, I believe.
Pretty much perfectly.
Things started flying.
He bought Amazon.
He bought FAS, which is a finance ETF. He bought the SPY, and then he bought Wynn Resorts, and then he bought some other company.
The stock, though, that crushed it for him was Meta.
The part that I get annoyed about, you know, aside from TikTok bans, this and that, you can't, he buys the stock, a couple months later, starts pushing and publicly vocalizing, like, hey everyone, we should ban TikTok, you know?
And it's like, pretty convenient to say when you own TikTok's main competitor, and every time you're saying that, the stock's going up 5%.
He then goes off and starts asking for the ban on...
And again, I feel like I'm pretty pro-ban TikTok, so there's a whole world with that.
But he then goes off and votes against the bill to ban TikTok.
So now you've got a politician that is buying TikTok's main competitor, Meta.
You're then publicly talking about how you want to ban it from government officials' phones to then...
Voting on the bill to ban TikTok all while the stock has gone up 200% while you've owned it.
And when he gets called out on it, and this is one of the reasons I dislike him, and I do think that there's a lot wrong with him personally, so I do feel sorry for him.
A lot wrong.
I know that.
But anyway, leaving that aside, the reason I don't like him...
Because after the financial crisis that Congress helped cause, Congress runs in with Dodd-Frank.
You know, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, member of the Senate, member of the House, both Democrats, and they come up with all these regulations that are supposedly going to protect America from future disasters of this kind, and they, you know, pass these so-called reforms, destroy the banking sector, really, don't make it less corrupt, just kind of wreck it, take all the innovation out of it, and then they don't apply those same standards to themselves.
So it was initially introduced in 2006. And the Stock Act literally, what it says is, stop trading on congressional knowledge.
That's what it means.
So if you have a bill that literally says stop trading on congressional knowledge as the name of the act, you know that there's something already sketchy going on.
After the housing crisis, they found out and they realized that there were around 33 politicians that set their portfolios up after talking with the officials at the Fed and, you know, the people building up the monetary policy.
They reconstructed their portfolios while that whole crisis was going on.
They didn't have to display or publicly talk about it because the Stock Act wasn't announced.
All that stuff came out after that, like, oh, while the housing market is crashing and Americans are losing their homes left and right, these politicians are moving millions, reconstructing their portfolios after getting out of the meetings with the Fed officials.
So that's how it came back onto the center stage.
The Stock Act then gets introduced in 2012, and then it gets passed shortly after that.
Well, they murdered the president of the United States in 1963 and no one was ever held accountable for it.
You know, looking back, you can say, boy, we've had big problems for a long time, but I can tell you, someone who grew up right in the middle of it, in D.C., in Georgetown, all this stuff was going on.
Like, when that COVID, those COVID trades, you started our conversation by describing, Kelly Loeffler was involved in that, and all this stuff.
I was like, part of me, I think I was the only person at Fox News who did anything on it, because it was a great story.
But even as I was doing the story, I was like, there's got to be another explanation.
I mean, he took my call and the whole thing, but I was like, this guy is the most controlled, scary, stupid, but also scary person I think I've ever dealt with in Congress, ever.
The thing that's interesting about me, again, from my background, is I don't know anything about these politicians.
I'm not a political person.
We call out the politicians, the Democrats.
The New York Times came out with a report in 2022 that said that 180 politicians traded over 3,700 times that totaled over $110, $115 million of volume from 2019 to 2021. Out of those, it was literally half, pretty much half Democrats, half Republicans.
So they're all doing it.
Out of those 180 politicians, though, 90 of them sat on committees that directly oversaw companies that they traded.
And you're like, okay, well, so that sounds like a conflict of interest.
And then that's what sparked me to get really into this and being like, what actually are the trades that are going on?
Are they outperforming?
Why are these random companies being bought?
And Mike McCullough in particular, he checks this.
Kind of box a lot.
He, for example, bought this stock in a company called Badger Meters earlier this year.
Badger Meters does a water meter solutions.
Don't know much about it.
It's just a freaking water meter.
It's $2 billion, $3 billion company.
Turns out that the EPA, a couple months, to be fair, before he bought, signed a mandate saying that all these water systems have to upgrade their technology.
Beneficial for Badger Meters.
Stock goes up.
He then did some further digging.
And then you realize that Tulsa, Oklahoma passed a $94 million bill to upgrade their own water meter systems right around the time that Mark Wayne Mullen bought Badger Meters.
Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma is the state that Mark Wayne Mullen represents.
He's the senator of it.
So then you're like, EPA passes the requirement to upgrade the water systems.
Senator buys stock.
Senators' home state gives $100 million to upgrade water meter systems.
You know, we're 15 now out in Irvine, California, just fucking around with some of these things.
And we're registered with the SEC. Are you in, do you invest in these funds?
Yeah, you can't.
So, I mean, you can and you can't.
I don't buy, like, the Pelosi ones because I ethically, I don't like to buy the companies that I tweet about because I don't want to believe in, like, if I tweet this, the stock will go up 20%.
You know, I just don't even want to get into that world.
I, though, invest in some of these other strategies.
I have around 5K in a strategy provided by QuiverQuant.
Great guys.
They do what Inusual Wells does, similar, on Instagram and Twitter.
They track the lobbying.
So they see which companies are spending the most on lobbying in D.C., and then they build a strategy around it to see if a strategy like that outperforms the market over time.
The bill that's got the farthest, and this is where, this just frustrates me with all the stuff going on, is there was a bill introduced by Josh Howley, John Ossoff, and a couple other politicians.
The reason why that one's important is because they got that to the Senate.
In the Senate, while they were in one of the committees, the way that the bills enter the floor is they have to get passed off by the committee.
This is the bill that made it the farthest.
In that bill, though, they offered kind of four things.
First, members can't trade stocks by 2025. This was introduced to 2024. Members can't trade stocks.
Second, spouses and dependents can't trade stocks through 2027. Third, Any private investment you have, you have to sell out of to run, to become a politician.
No one has ever asked for that.
That has never come up, and that became a big, big problem.
This is where it gets scary, and we have to be careful with what we're essentially pushing for.
So what everyone has asked for on these bills is no trading, no members and their spouses can trade, put it in a blind trust.
Now, this fourth bill, no trading, no members and spouse, blind trust, but also you have to sell out of every private investment.
And that, when they started debating it, Mitt Romney, Tim Scott, and a couple other politicians on it were like, wait a second, we can't vote yes on this.
If you guys are telling me that any future politician that wants to run has to sell out of private investments, that could become a major, major problem.
You know, if you want to run and be a politician, you'd have to sell out of your businesses.
If I were to run, I would have to sell out of my businesses.
A farmer would have to sell out of his family businesses.
Is that right?
Like, why are we essentially doing that?
And when you take a step back at the time, this was, you know, Kamala versus Trump.
Kamala just picked Tim Walz to be the VP. And you think about where the directions of each parties are going.
If you have a bill out there that bans...
Politicians from owning private investments, you are turning off kind of a whole part of future people.
You even just said, I own part of land in America.
From my memory, he doesn't own a house.
The only thing he owned on that public disclosure was a teacher's pension.
And then you start, it's like, where can we go with this path of, you know, pro-business, successful, competent people running our country versus career-long politicians that just know how to play the game of thrones in politics to be able to get to where they want?
The representative out of San Francisco, he's doing a lot on social media.
He doesn't have as much power, but he's calling for term limits.
And I think because we're looking at, you know, again, I'm 29. I'm not, I don't, I'm just out here just calling citizen journalism on X, feeling like this is ridiculous.
Let me build with my, like my skill set is I feel like I can do, I know how to use social media algorithms and I know how to build a product to get people involved in it.
Let me use this as the best way in my ability as an American citizen to promote change, to bring trust back into the institutions.
A big part of the problem looking at it is, like, what are these 85-year-olds doing?
Yeah, so this is what's the problem with the way that they disclose right now, is I don't know which ones are theirs or which ones are being run by a financial advisor.
Because some of them have financial advisors running their portfolios, but they still have to disclose it.
My hope is that it's financial advisors running some of these portfolios.
But, um, I would hope that they would be thoughtful enough that if you sit on a committee that's, you know, overseeing an industry that you would just call up to your broker and say, Hey, we can't buy anything that I regulate.
So do you feel, this is a sidebar, but you feel as a resident of LA, Santa Monica, you've watched looting for the past two years, because that's really what it is.
I just don't think people trust that things will get done.
And now if you take it out, you know, I love California.
I don't think it's as bad as people make it sound.
But if you can't trust the politicians, society crumbles.
And I see you with the trading.
If you can't trust the majority of politicians...
America will crumble.
Because why would I believe what the politician is telling me while I'm watching them do these other things right in front of my face and I can't do anything about it?
So we want them banned to get the trust back into that.
But the problem with the ban is if in that ban you would have to ban the kids and you would have to ban the spouses from trading, is it constitutionally allowed to say, hey, You know, say you're a senator from Florida, and you're like, hey, Tucker, you want to be a senator?
That's fine.
But per the Stock Act now, your kids can't trade stocks and your spouse can't trade stocks.
What if your kid is a hedge fund manager?
Or your kid is, you know, like, how do you ban that kid?
But I think a solution though can be in, this is where, like, get rid of the delay, make them file the same day so that you increase transparency around that.
I couldn't figure out why there was a delay to begin with.
I don't understand.
Why do you need a 45-day delay?
I don't know.
That's per the Stock Act.
But also, once you get rid of the delay, just make it so that either the politicians have to invest in a blind trust or major ETFs, or if you're not going to go that far, just don't allow them to trade companies they oversee.
And it's very, very simple.
If I'm a consultant covering pharmaceutical industry at Deloitte, Deloitte does not allow that consultant to buy pharmaceutical stocks.
They can buy other stocks, but they can't buy pharmaceutical.
And it's all just a step in the right direction towards something that we can get on the right path to trusting the politicians again.
If I'm thinking about it, because I haven't really thought too much about it on the sense of how can it actually do it so well?
My thought is maybe, though, the way that the markets work, and I'm no expert at this, is you want to buy the build-up and then you sell the news.
Kramer can just be slow with getting onto these popular stocks.
By the time he's talking about Tesla, by the time he's talking about, hey, go buy NVIDIA. It's like, yeah, everyone's been talking about NVIDIA for six months before you start talking about it.
The portfolio that we have for him on Autopilot is $15 million following him.
Following his inverse picks.
So essentially, we have a pseudo-ETF-ish sort of thing that does the exact opposite.
What's so cool is that you built a whole business mocking and simultaneously profiting from the corruption of politicians, but you're at the same time calling for an end to it.
And part of that money is in housing, but there still is a lot that goes into money management.
75% of kids who inherit their parents' money fire their parents' financial advisor the day they get that money.
So now you got a kid who has half a million dollars parked on his lap, fires the financial manager because it's like, who the heck are you?
And now they have to make the decisions of how do I invest this money?
Do I do it on my own?
Do I do it through a Google search, pick the top financial advisor?
Do I do it through a friend?
We think there's a lot of problems in that.
And there's no trust and transparency in those decisions.
So with Autopilot, what we're trying to do is solve that trust and transparent way by building a marketplace to find a money manager and then invest through that money manager in a way that you still have control.
And I think like what you said earlier, and I'm sorry for rambling, but...
The big, big thing that we're trying to do is we're trying to ensure that people's money builds the futures that they want.
And I think in 2030, 2035, 2040, this is going to become a bigger and bigger thing.
And a good example of the early inklings of this is this, whether it's conspiracy theory or not, we'll see what happens with it.
But this topic of BlackRock and Vanguard having money and taking the assets in their own ETFs and stuff and using that to sway public laws and public opinion in the states that they oversee.
They're getting sued in Texas.
They're getting sued in Florida.
And part of like, again, whether that's true or not, what annoys me personally when I invest is I want to make sure that my money goes towards my beliefs.
And if you have someone else managing your money, or you put your money in a Vanguard, you put your money in a BlackRock, there's possibilities for that to happen at a much broader scale than if you do it on your own.
We're trying to essentially build out the way that you can have your money managed without you having to sacrifice your own values, your own voter rights, your own beliefs.
For me personally, pro-America, I don't want any dollars invested in Chinese stocks.
And if I have maybe a couple hundred bucks if you're trying to swing an Alibaba, but if you got half a million dollars in that retirement, I don't want any of that invested in Alibaba.
Because inherently, you are funding a future where Alibaba succeeds.
Do you want that?
The other side is we have customers and we have clients that are like, I don't want my money invested in oil companies.
I want to be pro-EV. It's like, okay, but did you know that you got your retirement account with these other people and they have money in Chevron, Oxy, things like that.
That's what we're trying to solve and trying to build to.
And again, it all starts with just trust.
Because if you can't trust even where your money is being invested, what does that mean?
In my opinion, that means society is Worse off, because you don't even trust how your money is being managed in that state that you're in.
I live a lot of the year in a really rural area, and my whole life, no one I knew ever took any government benefits, because the idea was that we're proud, working-class people were not doing that.
And then the state brought in all these immigrants from Africa.
And gave them everything.
You know, houses, phones, airplane tickets, food vouchers, free medical.
Just, these are immigrants getting all this free stuff.
And everyone in the town where I am, which is very few immigrants, or people, not everyone, people I knew were like, wait a second.
You know, I served in the military.
I've worked, paid taxes my whole life.
I've never gotten anything from the government.
Screw it.
I'm putting in for any benefit I possibly can.
And it, you know, it's easy for me to disapprove because I'm rich.
So it's like, I don't have to do that.
But I got it.
It's like they all of a sudden realize people who've lived in this country their whole lives, you know, did a lot for the country, I would argue.
They realize the whole thing's a freaking scam, so I might as well get in on it.
If you have that attitude, man, things fall apart like that.
And she has had this one property that has made $100,000, lost $100,000.
And you all have to file this every year.
And in it, you have your income.
Made $100K, lost $100K, made $100K, lost $100K. The year that COVID happened, they made $5 million plus in profit.
So how do you go from, and this is income.
This isn't necessarily even just like, it's not necessarily loans or anything.
This is income.
You lose $100K. You make $100K. COVID happens.
The loans go out.
Your business now makes $5 million.
A year after that, you go back down to making $100K and then making $100K, losing $100K. So there was an anomaly.
This came out, I think, by the New York Post right after Thanksgiving, I think.
And they highlight this.
And it's like, was the corruption around these PPP loans, these COVID loans, Did this get up to the degree that the politicians were benefiting from this too?
And it seems like it did.
So that's again like the...
That frustrates me because we have a family company.
We sell sports compression products, little arm sleeves.
We don't necessarily have employees, but we're a small family business.
We took out a loan to survive because we sell in sports.
Sports got cancelled.
We have to pay that loan back, which is fine.
We knew that when we took it out that we have to pay this loan back.
But that loan money didn't go towards profiting us.
It essentially went towards sustaining us.
We had to pay it back, though.
That loan to Pelosi, the $5 million that she makes, it comes in as income.
You don't have to pay it back because it's just so messed up.
Dude, you're one of the reasons I like social media.
Whenever I think, oh, social media is turning everyone trans, and it's bad, then I see what you do, and I'm like, no, it's actually, there are some great things.
So it turns out that YouTube is suppressing this show.
On one level, that's not surprising.
That's what they do.
But on another level, it's shocking.
With everything that's going on in the world right now, all the change taking place in our economy and our politics, with the wars on the cusp of fighting right now, Google has decided you should have less information rather than more.
And that is totally wrong.
It's immoral.
What can you do about it?
Well, we could whine about it.
That's a waste of time.
We're not in charge of Google.
Or we could find a way around it, a way that you could actually get information that is true, not intentionally deceptive.
The way to do that on YouTube, we think, is to subscribe to our channel.
Subscribe.
Hit the little bell icon to be notified when we upload and share this video.
That way you'll have a much higher chance of hearing actual news and information.