[nescioquid]

Indeed. With a so-called "chinese wall" that only happens to work in one direction (husband has access to info from his wife, but he is careful not to tell her about his/their trading), this might not be a fib, but would certainly be a shining example of equivocation and corruption.

[nescioquid]

I apologize for responding to myself, but I want to point out that I don't know the specific laws that may govern whatever account under which Pelosi's husband is executing trades. As I understand it, all property between spouses (in Minnesota, at least) is considered implicitly as "joint tenants in common" between spouses, but this may not be the case in California.

If all property in California is considered joint tenants in common between spouses, then this gives the lie (not mere equivocation) to the statement that "...the speaker does not own any stocks".

Can anyone shed light on this matter?