Leavitt read out loud a list of trades made by Pelosi and her husband, Paul Pelosi, that she said beat out Warren Buffett and every hedge fund on Wall Street.
“The president has spoken to Senator Hawley, who called him, and the president took that call,” Leavitt said. “As the president said in the Roosevelt Room yesterday, conceptually, he of course supports the idea of ensuring that members of Congress and United States senators who are here for public service cannot enrich themselves.”
She didn’t hold back when naming names.
“And the reason that this idea—to put a ban on stock trading for members of Congress—is even a thing is because of Nancy Pelosi,” Leavitt said. “I mean, she is rightfully criticized because she makes, I think, $174,000 a year, yet she has a net worth of approximately $413 million.”
“In 2024, Nancy Pelosi’s stock portfolio—this was a fascinating statistic to me—grew 70% in one year, and her portfolio outperformed every single large hedge fund in that same year, and even more than doubled the returns of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway.”
Leavitt said the president supports the public’s outrage.
“So I think the president stands with the American people on this. He doesn’t want to see people like Nancy Pelosi enriching themselves off of public service and ripping off their constituents in the process.”
“As for the mechanics of the legislation and how it will move forward,” she added, “the White House continues to be in discussions with our friends on Capitol Hill.”
This came after Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, found himself on the receiving end of a harsh social media post by President Donald Trump.
Hawley is sponsoring a bill to ban members of Congress from being able to trade individual stocks. An amendment to the bill would have carved out an exemption to allow the president to engage in stock trading, but Hawley joined Senate Democrats in voting “no.” That prompted Trump to blast Hawley on Truth Social, calling him a “second-tier Senator.”
Hawley described the situation as a misunderstanding, telling Fox News that the bill exempts President Trump and Vice President Vance. The language instead bans future presidents from trading stock.
Republicans also attempted to add language that would have required a report on stock trades made by former Speaker Pelosi and her husband, but Senate Democrats and Republican Hawley teamed up and defeated the move.
In an interview with reporters on Tuesday, Hawley said that the legislation has the support of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), many Republicans, and even some Democrats. He also said Johnson told him President Donald Trump supported the original bill titled Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act.
“Members of Congress should be fighting for the people they were elected to serve—not day trading at the expense of their constituents,” stated Hawley in April when he originally introduced the bill. “Americans have seen politician after politician turn a profit using information not available to the general public. It’s time we ban all members of Congress from trading and holding stocks and restore Americans’ trust in our nation’s legislative body.”
The PELOSI Act would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from buying, selling, or holding individual stocks while serving in office. Instead, lawmakers would be permitted to invest in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), or U.S. Treasury bonds.
It began as a routine House Judiciary Committee hearing, but by the time it ended, the event had become the most-watched political drama in American history. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), one of the nation’s most visible and controversial progressive figures, found herself at the center of a storm that would shake the foundations of Congress, the media, and the very concept of political authenticity.
The tension in the hearing room was palpable from the start. AOC, dressed in her signature red Valentino blazer, stood at the microphone, a stack of documents in hand. Her opening salvo was as sharp as it was theatrical: “Director Patel, you’re a fascist running a Gestapo, and I have the evidence right here.”
Millions watched live as she accused FBI Director Kash Patel of weaponizing federal law enforcement against progressive members of Congress. Her words, chosen for maximum impact, reverberated across social media, instantly trending under hashtags like #AOCvsPatel and #PoliceStateExposed.
Behind AOC, her media-savvy team live-streamed the event, their captions blaring “AOC DESTROYS FASCIST FBI DIRECTOR” and “EXPOSING THE POLICE STATE LIVE.” The stage was set for a battle of wits and reputations.
Patel, in a plain suit and with a calm demeanor, sat motionless at the witness table. He let AOC’s accusations hang in the air, watching her with the detachment of someone who had seen this play before.
When AOC demanded he respond to the “leaked FBI memoranda” she wielded, Patel’s reply was quiet but devastating: “Congresswoman, may I see these documents?” The request was not what her team had anticipated. They had prepared for denial, deflection, or claims of executive privilege. Instead, Patel’s simple demand for transparency shifted the energy in the room.
Upon inspection, Patel revealed a crucial detail: the watermark on the documents was from a 2019 design, but he had only become director in 2025. “Those documents are forgeries,” he stated. The committee room fell silent as viewers at home saw the comment feeds slow, replaced by question marks and stunned emojis.
Patel didn’t stop at exposing the forgery. He opened his own briefcase, revealing folders meticulously labeled: “Met Gala Deception,” “Robert’s Scheme,” “Capital Mythology,” “Green New Deal Grift,” and “The Yorktown Files.” Each folder contained evidence, not just of AOC’s alleged misdeeds, but of a pattern of deception stretching back years.
He began with the infamous “Tax the Rich” Met Gala dress. Patel produced receipts, loan agreements, emails, and legal demands showing that AOC had not returned borrowed designer items, totaling $57,700 for one night’s outfit. The pattern, Patel argued, was not mere oversight but a calculated scheme: borrowing luxury goods, never returning them, and funneling campaign funds to designers under the guise of consulting fees.
Patel’s next folder detailed payments to AOC’s husband, Riley Roberts, through a web of LLCs and consulting contracts. According to campaign finance records, Roberts had received $890,000 for “digital marketing consulting,” yet staff depositions revealed no evidence of actual work produced. Patel traced $3.7 million in payments from progressive organizations to Roberts’s companies, all tied to gaining access to AOC.
Emails and text messages painted a damning picture: Roberts was allegedly selling legislative support. “Your husband was selling your vote,” Patel declared. Texts between AOC and Roberts suggested she was not only aware of the scheme, but actively directing it.
Patel then turned to January 6th, 2021. Security footage, phone records, and staged photographs suggested AOC was never in danger during the Capitol riot, yet she negotiated book deals and speaking engagements in real time. Her “survivor” narrative, Patel alleged, was crafted for profit, resulting in $7.7 million in earnings from appearances, book advances, and a Netflix documentary.
Therapy records showed only two sessions, one focused on maximizing the media narrative. Texts revealed a premeditated strategy: “If anything happens, we need to be ready to own the narrative. This could be our Reichstag fire moment.”
Patel’s fourth folder revealed SEC records showing AOC’s college roommate and other associates made millions trading renewable energy stocks days before major policy announcements. Texts suggested AOC advised these trades, justifying them as “political intelligence.” The pattern expanded to pharmaceutical and defense stocks, with evidence of coordination with corporate executives for mutual profit.
“Trading on the future you’re creating,” Patel said, “is not governance. It’s racketeering.” Estimated profits from insider trading: $47 million.
The final folder exposed alleged fabrications in AOC’s personal biography. Property records, school enrollments, employment and lease agreements, and social media posts suggested her “Bartender from the Bronx” persona was manufactured. Patel presented evidence that she grew up in affluent Westchester County, worked only six shifts as a bartender, and staged photos in a friend’s apartment.
Her voter registration used a Bronx business address to gain city resident discounts. Patel concluded, “You’re not Alexandria from the Bronx. You’re Sandy from Westchester playing a character designed by political consultants.”
As Patel finished, FBI agents entered the room. AOC’s staff had abandoned their posts, her live stream cut to an error message, and her carefully constructed persona unraveled in real time. Her voice, stripped of its practiced Bronx cadence, revealed the tones of Westchester privilege.
Her arrest became the most-watched political event in American history. Memes flooded the internet, pairing her “Tax the Rich” dress with images of her Yorktown Heights mansion. The communities she claimed to represent felt betrayed, and young activists who had looked up to her expressed heartbreak.
Democrats distanced themselves overnight, and the progressive movement was rocked by revelations that other “authentic” candidates had similarly fabricated their biographies. Financial markets crashed as investors realized the extent of insider trading linked to political announcements.
Riley Roberts was arrested at JFK airport, attempting to flee. The Justice Democrats’ leadership was indicted for conspiracy. Seven other representatives were implicated. The “Authenticity Act” was rushed through Congress, requiring extensive background verification for all federal candidates and strengthened financial disclosure laws.
In her trial, AOC was found guilty on all counts: fraud, theft, insider trading, conspiracy, money laundering, and false statements. She was sentenced to 25 years without parole. The progressive policies she championed suffered from association with her corruption, and the authenticity of all politicians was called into question.
In the end, the saga of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez served as a cautionary tale about the dangers of manufactured authenticity and unchecked ambition. As a Bronx organizer put it, “She didn’t just lie about who she was. She made it harder for those of us who actually are who we claim to be.”
The final image was not of AOC, but of the real bartenders, activists, and struggling workers who continued their fights without cameras or costume changes. They were left to rebuild trust in progressive politics, proving that not every claim of injustice is performance art.
The actress had taken her final bow. In American politics, the show—for once—was over.
Rachel Maddow, the renowned MSNBC host and political commentator, and her longtime partner, artist Susan Mikula, have reached a heartwarming milestone: 20 years of sharing their lives together.
The couple, known for their private yet profoundly inspiring relationship, marked this occasion with a minimalist yet deeply romantic photoshoot that has left fans in awe.
Adding a touch of timeless elegance, Maddow gifted Mikula a simple diamond necklace, symbolizing their enduring love.
This milestone is not just a celebration of time but a testament to the strength, mutual respect, and quiet devotion that define their bond.
The story of Rachel Maddow and Susan Mikula began in 1999 in Western Massachusetts, in a moment Maddow famously described as “love at first sight.” At the time, Maddow, fresh from Stanford University and working on her doctoral dissertation at Oxford, took on odd jobs to make ends meet. One such job led her to Mikula’s doorstep, where she was hired to do yard work.
“It was very Desperate Housewives,” Maddow later joked to People, recalling the serendipitous encounter. The connection was immediate, with Maddow telling The New Yorker in 2017, “Bluebirds and comets and stars. It was absolutely 100 percent clear.” Their first date, a quirky outing to the National Rifle Association’s “Ladies Day on the Range,” set the tone for a relationship that blends the unconventional with deep commitment.
Over the past two decades, Maddow and Mikula have built a life that balances their contrasting worlds. Maddow, a public figure known for her incisive political commentary on The Rachel Maddow Show, thrives in the spotlight, while Mikula, a celebrated photographer, prefers a quieter existence focused on her art.
Mikula’s work, often created using vintage techniques like pinhole and Polaroid cameras, has been showcased in galleries across New York, San Francisco, Miami, and beyond, with pieces in the permanent collection of the U.S. Embassy in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
Despite their 15-year age gap, their differences have only strengthened their partnership, with Mikula describing Maddow’s relentless work ethic and Maddow crediting Mikula’s support during personal challenges, including her struggles with depression.
The couple’s 20th anniversary photoshoot, shared subtly through social media, captured their understated elegance. Set against the rustic backdrop of their pre-Civil War farmhouse in Western Massachusetts, the images show Maddow and Mikula in simple, earthy tones, their smiles radiating warmth and intimacy.
Fans were particularly touched by the moment Maddow presented Mikula with a delicate diamond necklace, a gesture described as a symbol of “eternal love.” The minimalist design of the necklace mirrors the couple’s approach to their relationship: profound yet unpretentious, grounded in authenticity rather than extravagance.
Social media buzzed with admiration, with fans calling the photos “a beautiful reflection of a love that endures.”
This milestone joins a series of significant moments in their journey together. One of the most poignant was their shared experience during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, when Mikula faced a severe case of the virus.
Maddow, broadcasting from home, shared an emotional update on The Rachel Maddow Show, calling Mikula “the center of my universe” and admitting she “would have moved mountains” to take her place.
The ordeal, which Maddow described as the “scariest thing” she had ever faced, underscored the depth of their bond. Mikula’s recovery, though slow due to lingering symptoms like fatigue and headaches, was a turning point that deepened their appreciation for each other.
Other milestones highlight their shared life. Their first vacation together, a trip that solidified their early connection, allowed them to explore shared passions.
Mikula has been a steadfast presence at Maddow’s career milestones, from Emmy wins to book launches, including Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power and Blowout.
Likewise, Maddow has supported Mikula’s art exhibitions, often attending openings, such as Mikula’s 2009 show in Provincetown and her 2011 American Bond series in San Francisco.
Their annual anniversary celebrations, often private and reflective, have been moments to honor their journey, with Maddow once calling their relationship her “proudest accomplishment” in a 2008 interview with The Nation.
The couple’s decision to forgo marriage, despite its legalization in Massachusetts in 2004, reflects their belief in the unique creativity of their bond.
Maddow has expressed ambivalence about traditional institutions, noting in 2019 that she values the “alternative ways of recognizing relationships” developed within gay culture.
Instead, they’ve built a life centered on shared spaces—a Manhattan apartment and their Massachusetts farmhouse—where they enjoy simple pleasures like Mikula’s home-cooked meals and the antics of their “enormous dog” who “barks at floppy hats but not skateboarders.”
Maddow and Mikula’s 20-year milestone is more than a personal triumph; it’s a beacon for the LGBTQ+ community, showcasing a love that thrives on mutual respect and individuality.
Their minimalist anniversary photos and the diamond necklace gift encapsulate a relationship that doesn’t need grand gestures to shine.
As Maddow continues to shape political discourse and Mikula creates art that captures the essence of place and identity, their partnership remains a quiet, powerful force.
Fans, moved by their story, continue to celebrate a couple whose love, as Maddow once said, is “the only thing I would kill or die for without hesitation.”