up with been told go to college, get a job make a living. frankly, that s just not realistic for a generation. it is really frustrating, the boomers think were lazy, you know the whole term pull up your boot straps and work hard, to get the same life they had? no, the world is very different these days the next pandemic in 2025 might wipe this all out anyway i have no time to wait for retirement you ve got to will it into existence life just not fair, the world is a hot place, and the stock market which is the purest form of yolo. short sellers continue to get hurt by wallstreetbets. it s making me sick. this is populism coming for capitalism through gamestop. on the surface i can be pretty scattered. in the water though it s coming for me. because you re seeing everything is quiet. you hear your bubbles, you hear breathing. and you just hear the water around you. i don t give a shit about risk. i was deployed to the middle east, we were doing anti-terrorism force p
brown starts right now. i, pam. hey there, got a, say nancy mace asked a fair question, how do you lose that? kaitlan, the thank you so much. good evening everyone, i m pamela brown. anything you say can and be used against you in a court of law. the famous miranda rights are obviously not a concern to donald trump, at least not during his recent tv interview spree. because what he s revealing will likely be played in his trials, including the significant admission that he himself was the decider, the orchestrator of the efforts to overturn the election. you hire them, you never meet these people, you get a recommendation, they turn out to be wrought, and so they turn out to be not so good. in many cases, i didn t respect him. but i did respect others. i respected many others that said the election was rigged. were you calling the shots though, mister president? as to whether or not i believed it was rigged, sure. it was my decision. his decision, not only is the
spree. because what he s revealing will likely be played in his trials, including the significant admission that he himself was the decider, the orchestrator of the efforts to overturn the election. you hire them, you never meet these people, you get a recommendation, they turn out to be wrought, and so they turn out to be not so good. in many cases, i didn t respect him. but i did respect others. i respected many others that said the election was rigged. were you calling the shots though, mister president? as to whether or not i believed it was rigged, sure. it was my decision. his decision, not only is the admission striking, but it completely contradicts one of the defenses that his lawyers had floated that trump was just listening to his legal counsel. you are entitled to believe interest and invites of council. you have one of the leading constitutional scholars and united states, john eastman, saying to president trump that this is a protocol you can follow.
Retail investors calais. vlad, tentative can griffin, and melvin kept capital ceo clock in, and keith gill. you know the lawmakers are furious, and i want to have hearings about this? the problem is going to most likely be, that the system is designed terribly, the system gets abused, and it they need to make changes. first of all, to me, this was a whole dog and pony show. first, robinhood securities put the restrictions in place in an effort to meet increased regulatory deposit requirements, not to help hedge funds. you can see the way they re trying to weasel out of something. i understand it s part of the focus of the hearing is the decision of stock trading platforms to stop trading gamestop. i ll make clear on the exit that melvin capital played no role in this. they re not being honest and truthful about this. i want to be perfectly clear. citadel securities had no role in robinhood s decision to limit trading in gamestop.
so citadel is a real conglomerate, they have a hedge fund, they have a broker, and have a market maker. mr. griffin, this is not meant new lady in a stock whenever you can short sell 100 and 40%. they think there should be a limit on something like that? i m not sure it s worth us dead delving into legislative corrections for a very unique situation, in terms of the extreme size of the short interest. why could a stop be shorted over 100 percent? i don t even know how you re allowed to do that. mr. pleitgen, you made it comment in your testimony a minute ago, that you are not trying to manipulate stock, yet if you are short selling a stop 100 and 40%, explain to me why that s not manipulating a stop? anytime we shot a stock, our systems actually forces to find a borrower. we do short stocks in the context of all of the rules. the fundamental reason why this happened, isn t because we wanted to revolution constitutes funds, it s because there is an opportunity out there to