By Ricardo | Source

A platform called GovGreed [dot com] built a seven-layer machine learning system that cross-references every stock trade disclosed by every sitting politician against the bills their committees control, the campaign donations they receive, and the companies their votes directly impact.

It scored all 540 politicians currently in Congress. And the numbers are crazy:

56% of every stock purchase made by Congress in the last 16 months was on a stock directly affected by a bill the buyer later voted on. That is 6,170 out of 11,016 total purchases.

More than HALF of all congressional stock buys are on companies whose fate that same politician is about to decide.

343 of 540 Congress members actively trade stocks while holding access to nonpublic legislative information.

That is 63.8% of the entire legislature making market bets with an informational edge that would put any hedge fund manager in prison.

The AI identified 752 active “Triple Signals” in the current Congress. A Triple Signal fires when three conditions line up at once:

The politician sits on the committee controlling a bill, they traded stock in a company affected by that bill, AND they received campaign contributions from that same industry.

Bills carrying these insider indicators pass at 5.4 TIMES the normal rate.

Now look at the individual leaderboard:

• Nancy Pelosi’s estimated portfolio sits at $194 million with a Greediness score of 98.1 out of 100.
• Ro Khanna made 13,231 trades across 800+ different tickers.
• Michael McCaul made 32,302 trades and filed 6,670 of them late.
• Thomas Suozzi filed 86.4% of his trades late with an average delay of 396 days, meaning his disclosures landed over a YEAR after he made the trade.

And then there is Lisa McClain, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House. She has made 1,443 trades in three years, more than 98% of all politicians tracked.

She violated the STOCK Act twice in a single year, disclosing up to $900,000 in trades months after the legal deadline. Her husband bought up to $250,000 in Elon Musk’s xAI, which quietly converted into SpaceX equity before last Friday’s $2 trillion IPO.

The penalty for all of this? A $200 fine.

The number of Congress members ever prosecuted under the STOCK Act since it passed in 2012? Zero.

And the cruelest part is this:  A bill to ban congressional stock trading was introduced in January 2026. It has bipartisan support. Over 80% of American voters want it passed.

But Congress is sitting on it, because the people who would have to vote yes are the same people making millions from the system staying exactly the way it is.

• They write the insider trading laws;
• They exempt themselves from enforcement;
• They trade on the information those laws generate, and when they get caught, they pay a fine that is basically nothing.

The AI didn’t discover anything Congress was hiding. It just organized what was already public into a pattern so obvious that nobody can pretend it isn’t there anymore.

Suzi’s note:  The post on X included the following irritating exchange with Elizabeth Warren trying to pull a “gotcha” on Scott Bessent.  I wondered why it would be included, because Pocahontas actually is one member of congress who doesn’t trade on the stock exchange, an apparent rarity.   She wanted to grill Scott B on the President’s stock positions, and I asked Grok for clarification on that as well.

Why the Poster Included It:

Even though GovGreed shows Warren has zero personal stock trades (making her “clean” on direct insider trading), the poster likely added the clip for these reasons:

Irony/Hypocrisy Angle: Warren is a vocal, long-time advocate for banning congressional stock trading (she’s co-sponsored multiple bills on it). Critics view her as performative—she rails against the system while being a high-profile senator who benefits from influence, donor networks, committee power, and name recognition. The clip lets viewers see her “lecturing” style, which many find grating or selective (e.g., focusing on opponents while downplaying broader issues).

Broader Critique of the System: The post isn’t just about personal trades. It’s about the entire “legal insider trading operation.” Including Warren contrasts the “clean trader” with the “noisy reformer,” implying the problem runs deeper than individual portfolios—lobbying, committee influence, delayed reforms, etc. It humanizes the frustration: even non-traders in the club protect the status quo or use the issue politically.

Engagement Bait: The clip is emotionally charged and partisan-tinged. It triggers reactions from both sides (as seen in replies: some defend her consistency, others call her out on other “grifts” like Big Pharma influence or past controversies). This boosts visibility for the GovGreed analysis.

In short, it’s not about accusing Warren of trading stocks herself. It’s using her as a symbol of Washington theater around the issue the AI tool exposes. The poster is using the video to underscore that public outrage and hearings haven’t fixed the underlying incentives.

And you know what else?

“They show you trades. We predict the next one. GovGreed fuses ML, deep learning, and 7 intelligence layers to predict which politicians will trade — and in which sectors — before the 45-day disclosure window even opens.”

Official Position from Trump’s Side

The Trump Organization and family spokespeople have repeatedly claimed that:

• Trump’s portfolio is held in a revocable trust (controlled by his children as trustees).
• Day-to-day investment decisions, including the thousands of individual stock trades, are handled exclusively by independent third-party financial institutions / investment managers.
• Neither President Trump, his family members, nor The Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, approving, or even receiving advance notice of specific trades.
• Trades are executed via automated, model-based portfolios and direct indexing strategies.

Past U.S. presidents (especially from the 1970s onward) have primarily used qualified blind trusts — or simpler “plain vanilla” diversified holdings — to minimize conflicts of interest and avoid scrutiny over personal stock trading or investments.