Post from Truth Social

A Long Island endorsement assembled from the day's template

This is one of at least six New York House endorsements posted on 31 October 2026, three days before the midterm vote. Placed beside the NY-19 post about Josh Riley, it shows the pattern: the opponent's charge sheet is repeated nearly word for word. Riley "wants Open Borders, Men playing in Women's Sports, Transgender for Everyone, Defund the Police, and wants to take away your Second Amendment, meaning, your guns." Suozzi "wants Open Borders, Men playing in Women's Sports, Transgender for Everyone, Defund the Police, and your Guns." The policy list that closes the post ("Grow our Economy, Advance American Energy DOMINANCE, Cut Taxes and Regulations, Promote MADE IN THE U.S.A., Keep our Border SECURE ... Defend our always under siege Second Amendment ... PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH") appears in the Malliotakis and Lawler posts in the same order. What varies from post to post is a slot or two of candidate-specific material. Here that slot holds the stock-trading attack and a quoted New York Post headline.

Who wrote it

The post went up at 3:51 p.m. Eastern on a Saturday afternoon (EDT was still in effect; clocks fell back the next morning). It has a stable four-paragraph structure: honor and endorsement, attack on the opponent, the candidate's résumé, then "Complete and Total Endorsement" and a turnout call. It ends with a signature block, "President DONALD J. TRUMP," and a link to a turnout site. A media quote is pasted in with attribution ("— The New York Post"). None of this is what his own drafting looks like. The capitalization is decorative and consistent ("Great Honor," "Community," "Attorney"), and there are no homophones, no self-interruption, and no drift away from the candidate into his own grievances. Two phrases carry his voice. "Transgender for Everyone" is his rally coinage. "your Guns, forget about them, he wants to take them away" breaks the sentence the way he does when speaking. The most likely explanation is that staff wrote the post from his stock phrases, with perhaps one spoken-cadence line kept or added. The stock line is reused across the day's posts, so it is not evidence that he wrote this one.

Splitting the field into a lunatic and a selfless servant

Psychologically, the whole post rests on splitting. Suozzi is a "Radical Left Lunatic" who "should be banned from Congress, not running for it!" LiPetri "has dedicated his life to serving his Community" and "WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!" The devaluation stands out because the target does not fit it. Suozzi is a Problem Solvers Caucus centrist who voted for the Laken Riley Act and has publicly broken with his party on immigration. The template does not adjust for this. The opponent's actual record is never used, and the charges are interchangeable with those against Riley. That tells us the post does not respond to anything this particular opponent did. It is routine maintenance of a single out-group schema.

The insider-trading passage is the only part aimed at Suozzi himself: "using Insider Information that only a Congressman would have, he scandalously made a lot of money playing with Stocks." Suozzi has a documented history of late STOCK Act disclosures, so there is some basis for criticism. "Insider Information," though, is an accusation of a crime made with no evidence offered. The comparison to Pelosi brings in a familiar villain to make the charge feel bigger. There is a projective edge given the trading controversies around his own administration, but a staffer writing campaign copy is a more economical explanation than any defense of his own.

Narrative and order

LiPetri is cast as a "MAGA Warrior" and a restorer of order: "Ensure LAW AND ORDER," "Stop Migrant Crime," "Keep our Border SECURE." The opponent stands for disorder in culture and the economy. Trump appears in the post only as the person who grants endorsement, the king handing out favor through "my Complete and Total Endorsement." He casts himself as patron, not as a fighter or a victim, and there is no wound in the post for that role to answer.

Rhetoric and risk

The techniques are standard campaign fare: superlative ("Biggest Tax Cut in the History of our Country"), straw-man stacking of positions the opponent does not hold, guilt by association with Pelosi, an appeal to fear about guns ("your Guns ... he wants to take them away"), and an imperative close ("GET OUT AND VOTE FOR MIKE"). The call to mobilize is electoral. "Banned from Congress" is the sharpest line, and it is hyperbole about holding office, not a call for anyone to act against Suozzi. There is no dehumanizing vocabulary and nothing violent.

What the facts support

Suozzi did vote against the July 2025 reconciliation bill, which raised the SALT cap to $40,000. He objected that the increase was temporary and phased out for higher earners. The bill was not the largest tax cut in U.S. history by share of GDP. The ideological charges against Suozzi do not match his record. The New York Post headline and the 35% figure could not be confirmed here and are left unverified.

Fact Verification

The insider-trading charge has nothing behind it. His documented ethics problems are all about late or missing paperwork, not trading on nonpublic information:

• The Office of Congressional Ethics opened its review in 2021 after a Campaign Legal Center complaint. Its only stated allegation was that he 'may have failed to file timely Periodic Transaction Reports.' The report mentions the STOCK Act's insider-trading ban only as background law and makes no finding that he used nonpublic information.
• In July 2022 the House Ethics Committee unanimously found 'not clear evidence' of a 'knowing or willful' STOCK Act violation and declined to penalize him.
• Later reporting by Business Insider and Fortune covered more late or undisclosed filings. Fortune covered a March 2025 Global Industrial stock sale and said nothing about insider trading. His office said that sale was the only trade he made that year, used to pay financial-adviser fees. In a 2022 ethics interview Suozzi said an adviser directed his trades.

The campaign record is the same. City & State (August 2026) and Patch's write-up of the October 20, 2026 News 12 debate both cover attacks from Mike LiPetri, JD Vance and a Trump-aligned PAC. These say he 'made millions trading stocks' and voted against the Stop Insider Trading Act. Neither outlet reports any investigation, finding or evidence that he traded on information gained in office. Suozzi says he hasn't traded a stock since January 2025 and co-sponsors bills to ban members from owning individual stocks. He says he voted against the Stop Insider Trading Act because it carried unrelated provisions, which other reports identify as voter ID.

The post states as fact a serious accusation that no ethics body, regulator or news investigation has supported. A high return alone does not show insider trading, especially one driven by a single mega-cap holding. Because the 'made a lot of money' part is accurate but the 'insider information' part is unsupported, the claim is rated mostly false. | | "New York Post headline: Long Island Representative Tom Suozzi beats Pelosi's stock portfolio performance with 35% return" | True | The headline is real. The New York Post ran 'Long Island Rep. Tom Suozzi beats Pelosi's stock portfolio performance with 35% return', and AOL syndicated it under that exact title. The post quotes it nearly word for word, changing only 'Rep.' to 'Representative'. ZeroHedge, a January 5, 2026 repost, and other aggregators confirm the reporting. It is dated January 3, 2026 and built on Quiver Quantitative data given exclusively to the Post.

The figures match what the story said:

• Suozzi's portfolio returned about 35% in 2025, the best of any Democrat.
• That beat the Dow (14%), the S&P 500 (17%) and the Nasdaq (21%).
• Pelosi gained about 18% in 2025, so the 'beats Pelosi' framing holds for that year.
• Rep. Tim Moore (R-NC) had the best overall return, at 52%.

Trump had already posted the same headline on Truth Social in February 2026, when he first endorsed LiPetri and called for Suozzi's removal from Congress.

Two caveats. The comparison covers 2025 only; Pelosi's reported 2024 return was much higher, at 54%. And the article reports returns and does not allege or show insider trading. One partisan site disputed the Post's figure, but nothing corroborates that. As a claim that the Post ran this headline with this figure, it is accurate. | | "Mike LiPetri is an attorney and former New York State Assemblyman" | True | LiPetri is an attorney who represented the 9th Assembly District from 2019 to 2020. |

Overall Veracity: 48%