ReportWire

Tag: Domestic Politics

  • Trump surrenders, is booked in Georgia election-interference case

    Trump surrenders, is booked in Georgia election-interference case

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump turned himself in at Georgia’s Fulton County jail on Thursday evening, with this latest move in his numerous legal fights standing out in part because it’s expected to yield a mug shot.

    See: Donald Trump’s mug shot could become ‘the most famous in the world’

    Trump’s private plane landed in Atlanta around 7 p.m. Eastern, and a motorcade took him directly to the Fulton County jail in Atlanta. After about 20 minutes of processing inside the jail, the motorcade then took him back to his plane for his return to New Jersey.

    Trump made a brief statement before boarding his plane, calling his indictment a “travesty of justice.”

    Fulton County’s booking system recorded Trump as having “blonde or strawberry” hair, a height of 6-foot-3 and weighing 215 pounds.

    Former President Donald Trump poses for his booking photo at the Fulton County Jail on Thursday.


    Fulton County Sheriff’s Office via Getty Images

    Trump was quickly released on a $200,000 bond and will now wait until an arraignment next month to enter pleas in this election-interference case. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is seeking an Oct. 23 trial date for Trump and the other 18 defendants in the case, but Trump is opposing that start date.

    Earlier in the day, Trump replaced his lead counsel, Drew Findling, with veteran criminal attorney  Steven Sadow, who is known for defending a number of prominent rappers in high-profile criminal cases. The New York Times reported Trump used a commercial bail bondsman, Charles Shaw of Foster Bail Bonds, to post his bond, and paid him a $20,000 fee, or 10% of his bail amount.

    The former president was indicted last week by a grand jury in Fulton County over his efforts to overturn Georgia’s results in the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. He faces 13 criminal counts, including racketeering, filing false documents, conspiracy to commit forgery and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.

    Thursday’s proceedings in Atlanta mark the fourth time that the 45th president has surrendered this year following an indictment.

    Trump, the frontrunner in the undefined, also is dealing with a Manhattan case over hush-money payments, a Miami case over classified documents and a Washington, D.C., case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

    He has denied wrongdoing and argued all of the cases are politically motivated. Many Republican voters have agreed with his take and rallied around Trump in the past few months, leaving him with 55.4% support in primary polls, according to a RealClearPolitics moving average of surveys as of Thursday.

    See: Trump calls his four indictments ‘nonsense’ during Tucker Carlson interview airing opposite the GOP debate

    The Fulton County prosecutor’s case was spurred in part by a recording of a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump said Raffensperger, a Republican, should “find 11,780 votes,” or enough to erase Biden’s edge in the state.

    In a post on his Truth Social platform Thursday afternoonu, Trump reiterated his assertion that the phone call was “perfect,” and he repeated his criticisms of Willis, describing her as a “Radical Left, Lowlife District Attorney.”

    Willis, a Democrat, has set a Friday deadline for defendants to turn themselves, and Trump associates Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows are among the high-profile individuals who have met that deadline.

    Now read: Trump would have to wait years if he were to be pardoned in Georgia case — with no president or governor able to deliver

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump calls his four indictments ‘nonsense’ during Tucker Carlson interview airing opposite the GOP debate

    Trump calls his four indictments ‘nonsense’ during Tucker Carlson interview airing opposite the GOP debate

    [ad_1]

    ‘I got indicted four times, all trivia, all nonsense.’

    That was former President Donald Trump speaking to former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in a pre-taped interview that was posted just a few minutes before the Republican presidential debate kicked off Wednesday night. 

    The wide-ranging chat that ran roughly 45 minutes saw Trump and Carlson taking shots at Trump’s legal troubles, his GOP and Democratic rivals, cable news networks and more. They did not get into pocketbook issues like inflation, Social Security or student loan debt.

    Trump confirmed over the weekend that he was skipping the first GOP primary debate for the 2024 race because “the public knows who I am,” and he had little to gain from joining his rivals on stage.

    He said something similar during the Carlson interview. “We’re doing this interview, but we’ll get bigger ratings using this crazy forum that you’re using than probably the debate,” Trump mused. “I think cable [viewership] is down because it’s lost credibility.”

    It remains to be see what sort of ratings the Fox News debate will pull in from the live broadcast, from streams and from later viewings, of course. Just before 10 p.m. Eastern, the clip posted to Tucker Carlson’s feed on X.com was approaching 75 million views.

    Read more: Non-Trump Republican presidential candidates to try for ‘breakout moment’ in this week’s debate

    Trump had teased on his Truth Social platform ahead of the debate that “sparks will fly,” and the sitdown with Carlson at the former president’s private golf club in Bedminster, N.J. And Carlson’s wide-ranging interview topics were designed with soundbites in mind, such as asking Trump about Jeffrey Epstein, or whether another civil war is brewing in the U.S. — as opposed to many issues top of mind for voters, such as high inflation.

    Tucker Carlson speaks with former President Donald Trump during a pre-taped interview, which was posted to X at the same time as the first Republican presidential debate for the 2024 primary on Wednesday.


    “Tucker on X” via X

    Some highlights from the Trump & Tucker show:

    On why Trump skipped the Fox News debate:

    “Do I sit there for an hour or two hours, whatever it’s going to be, and get harassed by people that shouldn’t even be running for president? Should I be doing that?” he asked, especially since he’s such a frontrunner in the polls, so far.

    “I just felt it would be more appropriate not to do the debate. I don’t think it’s right to do it if you’re leading by 50, 60, one poll I’m leading by 70 points,” he said.

    And he threw in a dig to Fox News, calling it “A network that isn’t particularly friendly to me.” 

    He also said the network made “a terrible move” in firing Carlson.

    On the state of the nation:

    “We have a country that is very fragile right now,” Trump said, arguing he’s a candidate for the left, the right and independents, alike.

    “You have great people in the Democrat party, you have great people that are Democrats. Most people in the country are fantastic,” he said, “and I’m representing everybody, I’m not just Republican or conservative, I represent everybody, I’m the president of everybody.”  

    And on his legal issues:

    “The four indictments, and maybe there will be more, I don’t know,” he said. But he said his poll numbers and fundraising keep going up after each indictment because, “I think the people in this country don’t get enough credit for how smart they are. They get it, they really get it … I got indicted four times, all trivia, all nonsense. Bullshit, it’s all bullshit.”

    And catch up to what his GOP rivals were getting into by following MarketWatch’s debate live blog here.

    Carlson ended the interview by asking Trump whether the country is headed for civil war or open conflict. Trump called Jan. 6 “an interesting day,” and said he didn’t know. “There’s a level of passion that I’ve never seen. There’s a level of hatred that I’ve never seen. And [that’s] probably a bad combination.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republican debate: Why you may hear big numbers like 19% inflation, and how to make sense of it all

    Republican debate: Why you may hear big numbers like 19% inflation, and how to make sense of it all

    [ad_1]

    Economists don’t much like presidential-campaign seasons. For them, it’s a bit like seeing their manicured gardens getting trampled by schoolchildren having a water-balloon fight.

    Robert Brusca, the president of consulting firm FAO Economics, predicted that the political discussion of the U.S. economy in the 2024 campaign would be “a farce.”

    Talk of inflation is likely to dominate the Aug. 23 Republican debate, for example.

    Republicans, eager to lay the blame for higher prices at the feet of President Joe Biden, are going to make the strongest case they can for that. For them, it is a happy coincidence that inflation started to pick up right when Biden was sworn into office.

    Larry Kudlow, a former top economic adviser to President Donald Trump, put it succinctly. “I have numbers. The consumer-price index is up 16% since February 2021. Groceries are up 19%. Meat and poultry up 19%. New cars up 20%. Used cars up 34%,” Kudlow said in an interview on the Fox Business Network.

    From last month: Mike Pence says inflation is 16%, but CPI is 3%. This is his logic.

    Unlike Kudlow, the Federal Reserve doesn’t usually measure inflation over 29 months. Instead, the central bank favors using inflation data that looks at the past 12 months.

    By that year-over-year measure, CPI is up 3.2%. Groceries are up 3.6%. Meat and poultry prices are up 0.5%. New-vehicle prices are up 3.5%, but prices of used cars and trucks are actually down 5.6%.

    Economists, meanwhile, tend to like even shorter measures, such as the three-month annualized rate. They think the 12-month rate says more about the rate a year ago than it does about what is happening today.

    “Looking at year-over-year [data], the only new piece of information is the current month. You are looking at 11 months that you already know,” said Omair Sharif, president and founder of research company Inflation Insights.

    Using the shorter metric, headline CPI for the three months ending in July is up 1.9%, while food at home rose 1.1% and meat and poultry is down 4.5%, he said.

    Trends have been favorable in recent months, but that might not last. “It’s been a good summer,” Sharif said. “But unfortunately, the winter data won’t be as pleasant.”

    What caused the spike in inflation?

    Economists tend not to blame one political party or the other for spikes in inflation.

    In the 1970s, for example, the culprit was increases in oil prices by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

    This time, there was no one single factor. While the debate is not yet over, economists tend to focus on the pandemic, the war in Ukraine and the move to end reliance on fossil fuels in order to combat climate change.

    Brian Bethune, an economics professor at Boston College, said prices started to rise when the healthcare industry had to adjust to a new, unforeseen risk. There were steep costs to dealing with the deadly coronavirus and developing vaccines.

    People working in frontline industries were able to command higher wages. And demand outstripped supply for many things, as shelves were emptied by consumers and supply chains were strained.

    Bethune also stressed recent moves toward renewable energy. The best way to explain inflation to your grandmother, he said, is to look at a chart of electricity prices.


    Uncredited

    The steady increase stems from efforts to move closer to a carbon-free economy, Bethune said. And those prices get passed along “right through the whole cost pressure of the economy,” including the price of refrigerated foods.

    Inflation boomed and is now coming off its peak, said Brusca of FAO Economics. Prices are still rising, but not at the same rapid clip. And they won’t roll back to prepandemic levels.

    “Consumers are caught in a trap,” he said. “If prices are going to come down, you have got to have deflation.”

    Deflation comes with its own unique set of woes. It can make the cost of borrowed money, like mortgages, much more expensive. And it can lead to serious economic weakness.

    “All of this is why the Fed targets price stability,” Brusca said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says he will surrender Thursday on Georgia election-interference charges

    Trump says he will surrender Thursday on Georgia election-interference charges

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump says he will surrender to authorities in Georgia on Thursday to face charges in the case accusing him of illegally scheming to overturn his 2020 election loss.

    “Can you believe it? I’ll be going to Atlanta, Georgia, on Thursday to be ARRESTED,” Trump wrote on his social media network Monday night, hours after court papers said his bond was set at $200,000.

    The Fulton County Sheriff’s Office said in a news release Monday afternoon that when Trump surrenders there will be a “hard lockdown” of the area surrounding the main county jail.

    Trump, according to the papers, is also barred from intimidating co-defendants, witnesses or victims in the case — including on social media — according to the bond agreement signed by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, Trump’s defense attorneys and the judge. It explicitly includes “posts on social media or reposts of posts” made by others.

    Trump has repeatedly used social media to attack people involved in the criminal cases against him as he campaigns to reclaim the White House in 2024. He has been railing against Willis since before he was indicted, and singled out Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp — a Republican who rebuffed his efforts to overturn the election — by name in a social media post Monday morning.

    The agreement prohibits the former president from making any “direct or indirect threat of any nature” against witnesses or co-defendants, and from communicating in any way about the facts of the case with them, except through attorneys.

    The order sets Trump’s bond for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations — or RICO — charge at $80,000, and adds $10,000 for each of the 12 other counts he is facing. Bond is the amount defendants must pay as a form of collateral to ensure they show up in court ahead of trial.

    Willis has set a deadline of noon Friday for Trump and his 18 co-defendants to turn themselves in to be booked. The prosecutor has proposed that arraignments for the defendants follow during the week of Sept. 5. She has said she wants to try the defendants collectively, and bring the case to trial in March of next year, which would put it in the heat of the presidential nominating season.

    In Fulton County, when defendants are not in custody, their lawyers and the district attorney’s office will often work out a bond amount before arraignment and the judge will sign off on it. The defendants will generally be booked at the Fulton County jail. During the booking process, they are typically photographed and fingerprinted and then they provide certain personal information. Since Trump’s bond has already been set, he will be released from custody once the booking process is complete.

    A Trump spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A phone message seeking comment was also left for an attorney for the former president.

    Trump was charged last week in the case alongside a slew of allies, who prosecutors say conspired to subvert the will of voters in a desperate bid to keep the Republican in the White House after he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

    Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and he characterizes the case — and three others he is facing — as efforts to hurt his 2024 presidential campaign. He has regularly used his Truth Social platform to single out prosecutors and others involved in his cases, and to continue to spread falsehoods that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

    In a post on Monday, Trump called the Fulton County district attorney “crooked, incompetent, & highly partisan.” He also attacked Kemp, whom he has long targeted for the governor’s refusal to intervene after the 2020 election. Kemp has been outspoken in pushing back against Trump, writing in social media last week: “The 2020 election in Georgia was not stolen.”

    Bond was also set Monday for three lawyers who were indicted along with Trump. For each of them, the bond for the RICO charge was set at $20,000, with varying amounts for the other charges they face. John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro each had a bond set at $100,000.

    Bail bondsman Scott Hall, who was accused of participating in a breach of election equipment in rural Coffee County, had his bond set at $10,000. Another defendant, Georgia-based attorney Ray Smith, has been assessed a $50,000 bond. Smith is charged with helping organize fake electors for Trump and trying to sway Georgia lawmakers with false statements alleging election fraud.

    Other defendants include former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows; Trump attorney and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and a Trump administration Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, who aided the then-president’s efforts to undo his election loss in Georgia.

    The Georgia indictment comes just two weeks after the Justice Department special counsel charged Trump in a separate case in a vast conspiracy to overturn the election. Besides the two election-related cases, Trump faces a federal indictment accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents as well as a New York state case charging him with falsifying business records.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says he will skip Republican presidential primary debates

    Trump says he will skip Republican presidential primary debates

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump confirmed Sunday that he will be skipping Wednesday’s first Republican presidential primary debate — and others as well.

    “The public knows who I am & what a successful Presidency I had,” Trump wrote on his social media site. “I WILL THEREFORE NOT BE DOING THE DEBATES!” His spokesman did not immediately clarify whether he plans to boycott every primary debate or just those that have currently been scheduled.

    The former president and early GOP frontrunner had said for months that he saw little upside in joining his GOP rivals on stage when they gather for the first time in Milwaukee Wednesday, given his commanding lead in the race. And he had made clear to those he had spoken to in recent days that his opinion had not changed.

    Also read: Non-Trump Republican presidential candidates to try for ‘breakout moment’ in this week’s debate

    “Why would I allow people at 1 or 2% and 0% to be hitting me with questions all night?” he said in an interview in June with Fox News host Bret Baier, who will be serving as a moderator. Trump has also repeatedly criticized Fox, the host of the Aug. 23 primetime event, insisting it is a “hostile network” that he believes will not treat him fairly.

    Trump had been discussing a number of debate counterprogramming options, including sitting for an interview with ex-Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who has been hosting a show on the website formerly known as Twitter. Carlson was spotted at Trump’s Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club ahead of the announcement, according to a person familiar with the visit who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it. The New York Times reported Saturday the interview set to air Wednesday has already been taped.

    “We cannot confirm or deny — stay tuned,” said Trump spokesman Steven Cheung.

    The idea had been one of several alternatives Trump had floated in conversations in recent weeks. They included possibly showing up in Milwaukee at the last minute or attending but sitting in the audience and offering live commentary on his Truth Social site. He had also discussed potentially calling into different networks to draw viewers from the debate, or holding a rally instead.

    The decision marks another chapter in Trump’s ongoing feud with Fox, which was once a staunch defender, but is now perceived to be more favorable to his leading rival, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Fox executives and hosts had lobbied Trump to attend, both privately and on the network’s airwaves. But Trump, according to a person close to him, was unswayed, believing executives would not have been wooing him if they weren’t concerned about their ratings.

    A person familiar had said earlier Sunday that Trump and his team had not notified the Republican National Committee of his plans.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s rivals had been goading him to appear and preparing in the hopes that he might, concerned that a no-show might make them appear like second-tier candidates and deny them the opportunity to land a knockout blow against the race’s Goliath that could change the trajectory of the race.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, one of the few candidates willing to directly take on Trump, has been accusing the former president of lacking “the guts to show up” and calling him “a coward” if he doesn’t.

    A super PAC supporting DeSantis also released an ad in which the narrator says: “We can’t afford a nominee who is too weak to debate.”

    Trump has pushed back on the attacks, telling Newsmax’s Eric Bolling that he saw little benefit in participating when he’s already leading by a wide margin.

    “It’s not a question of guts. It’s a question of intelligence,” he said.

    Trump has also said that he will not sign a pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee if he loses the nomination — a requirement set by the Republican National Committee for appearing on stage.

    “Why would I sign it?” he said. “I can name three or four people that I wouldn’t support for president. So right there, there’s a problem.”

    Nonetheless, his advisers insisted for weeks that he had yet to make a final decision, even as they acknowledged it was “pretty clear” from his public and private statements that he was unlikely to appear.

    It’s not the first time Trump has chosen to skip a major GOP debate.

    During his 2016 campaign, Trump decided to forgo the final GOP primary face-off before the Iowa caucuses and instead held his own campaign event — a flashy telethon-style gathering in Iowa that was billed as a fundraiser for veterans.

    While the event earned him headlines and drew attention away from his rivals, Trump went on to lose the Iowa caucuses to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas — a loss some former aides have blamed, at least in part, on his decision to skip the debate.

    In 2020, Trump pulled out of the second general election debate against now-President Joe Biden after the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonpartisan group that has hosted general election debates for more than three decades, sought to make it virtual after Trump tested positive for COVID-19. Trump refused, saying he would only debate on stage.

    Trump is not the only candidate who will likely be missing Wednesday’s event. Several lesser-known rivals appear unlikely to reach the threshold set by the RNC to participate. To qualify, candidates must have received contributions from at least 40,000 individual donors, with at least 200 unique donors in 20 or more states. They also must poll at at least 1% in three designated national polls, or a mix of national and early-state polls, between July 1 and Aug. 21.

    Candidates who have met the qualifications include DeSantis, Christie, former vice president Mike Pence, tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott.

    Beyond the fundraising and polling requirements, the RNC has said candidates must also sign the pledge agreeing to support the eventual party nominee as well as agreeing not to participate in any non-RNC sanctioned debate for the remainder of the election cycle. The RNC is boycotting events organized by the Commission for Presidential Debates, alleging bias.

    “I affirm that if I do not win the 2024 Republican nomination of President of the United States, I will honor the will of the primary voters and support the nominee in order to save our country and beat Joe Biden,” reads the pledge, according to a copy posted by DeSantis to X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter. Candidates also must pledge not to run as an independent, write-in candidate or third-party nominee.

    While several candidates, including Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson have taken issue with the requirement, former Texas Rep. Will Hurd so far is the only one who has said definitively that he will not sign the pledge because he refuses to support Trump if he becomes the eventual nominee. Christie has said he will sign whatever is needed to get him on the stage.

    In addition to voicing opposition to the loyalty pledge, Trump has suggested he is opposed to boycotting general election debates hosted by the Commission on Presidential Debates. “You have, really, an obligation to do that,” he said in a radio interview this spring.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Donald Trump indicted in Georgia election-interference case

    Donald Trump indicted in Georgia election-interference case

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump was criminally indicted by a grand jury in Georgia’s Fulton County on Monday night in connection with a probe into his efforts to overturn the state’s results in the 2020 presidential election.

    The 41-count indictment against Trump and 18 of his associates, including Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Trump adviser John Eastman, was handed to a judge in Atlanta around 9 p.m. Eastern after a daylong session by the Fulton County grand jury, and the details…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pence qualifies for first Republican debate: Here’s who else will be on stage.

    Pence qualifies for first Republican debate: Here’s who else will be on stage.

    [ad_1]

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has become the eighth, and perhaps final, candidate to qualify for the first Republican presidential primary debate, setting up a possible prime-time clash with Donald Trump.

    That face-off with Trump is not certain, however, because the former president has not yet confirmed whether he will take part in the event.

    Several other GOP hopefuls, meanwhile, have also qualified for the debate. Here’s a look at details including who’ll be on stage and when and where the debate will be held.

    When and where is the debate?

    The first debate of the GOP primary season will be held Aug. 23 in Milwaukee, the same city that will host the party’s 2024 convention. The two-hour debate is scheduled to start at 9 p.m. Eastern time and is being hosted by Fox News.

    Fox News parent Fox Corp.
    FOX,
    +5.56%

    FOXA,
    +5.59%

    and News Corp
    NWS,
    +0.73%

    NWSA,
    +0.84%
    ,
    parent of MarketWatch publisher Dow Jones, share common ownership.

    Besides Pence, who has qualified?

    North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and Trump have all met the debate requirements.

    Other GOP hopefuls including former Rep. Will Hurd of Texas and Miami Mayor Francis Suarez have not yet made the cut.

    Now read: Here are the Republicans running for president in 2024, before their first debate later this month

    Also read: Mike Pence says inflation is 16%, but CPI is 3%. This is his logic.

    What are the requirements for the Milwaukee debate?

    For the first debate, a candidate needs to have at least 1% support in three high-quality national polls or in a mix of state and national polls and must have secured at least 40,000 unique donors.

    Getting on stage for the second debate will be tougher. That contest, scheduled for Sept. 27 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California, will require candidates to have at least 3% support in two national polls, or in one national poll as well as two polls from four of the early-voting states. Candidates must also have at least 50,000 unique donors, as the Associated Press has reported.

    Now read: Republican Party raising qualification bar for second presidential primary debate

    What has Trump said about attending the debate?

    Playing his cards close to the vest, the former president is asking his supporters whether he should be in Milwaukee on Aug. 23. In an email on Saturday, Trump said he thinks it’s “sort of foolish” for him to attend, given his outsized polling lead.

    “Hopefully, former President Trump has the courage to show up,” Pence’s communications adviser Devin O’Malley said in a statement on Tuesday.

    Read next: Pence, Trump attorney offer conflicting claims over what Trump said ahead of Jan. 6

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. stocks would be much lower if it wasn’t for ‘excessive’ government spending, Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson says

    U.S. stocks would be much lower if it wasn’t for ‘excessive’ government spending, Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson says

    [ad_1]

    U.S. stocks would be in much worse shape in 2023 if it wasn’t for “excessive” fiscal policy from the government and explosive money-supply growth in recent years.

    That’s the latest take from Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson, the bank’s chief investment strategist who, as MarketWatch’s Steve Goldstein pointed out earlier, seems to never miss an opportunity to recall how wrong his market calls have been this year.

    In his latest note, Wilson told clients and the financial press that excessive government spending has helped prop up the U.S. economy and markets to a degree that Wilson and his team failed to anticipate.

    “Part of the reason we’ve found ourselves offside this year is that the fiscal impulse returned with a vengeance and remained quite strong in 2023 — something we didn’t factor into our forecasts,” Wilson said in the note.

    In an accompanying chart, Wilson noted that fiscal spending looks particularly excessive when compared with the U.S. unemployment rate, which fell to 3.5% in July, according to data from the Department of Labor released on Friday.


    MORGAN STANLEY

    To be sure, Wilson was one of a select few on Wall Street to correctly anticipating last year’s inflation-driven selloff.

    But heading into the New Year, he expected stocks would tumble to new lows during the first half of 2023.

    And after hanging on to his bearish view for months in spite of a powerful rally in equities driven by the artificial intelligence craze and a surprisingly resilient U.S. economy, he’s recently taken the opportunity to reflect on why he got it wrong, while acknowledging the possibility that the rally could continue.

    See: Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson admits ‘we were wrong’ about 2023 stock-market rally, but refuses to throw in the towel

    See: Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson is warming to the U.S. stock-market rally. Here’s what would make him turn bullish.

    It’s possible, even likely, that the government’s excessive spending could continue, at least until it comes time to raise the debt ceiling again in 2025.

    Fitch Ratings last week cited projections for ballooning budget deficits for helping to inspire its decision to strip the U.S. of its AAA credit rating.

    “The main takeaway for the equity market this year is that fiscal policy has allowed
    the economy to grow faster than forecast, giving rise to the consensus view that the
    risk of a recession has faded considerably. Furthermore, with the recent lifting of the debt ceiling until 2025, this aggressive fiscal spending could continue,” Wilson said.

    The biggest problem with spending so much during good economic times, however, is that it limits Congress’s ability to act when another recession inevitably arrives.

    That could create problems for corporate earnings and, by extension, stocks, down the road, Wilson said.

    “If fiscal policy is showing such little constraint in good times, what happens to the deficit when the next recession arrives?”

    U.S. stocks were trading higher early Monday after the S&P 500
    SPX
    logged its fourth straight day in the red on Friday, capping off the worst week for stocks since March. The index was up 0.5% in recent trade near 4,500, while the Nasdaq Composite
    COMP
    was 0.2% lower at 13,881.

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    which has surged higher over the past month as traders have favored some of this year’s market laggards, was up 300 points, or 0.9%, at 35,362.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump pleads not guilty in Jan. 6 case

    Trump pleads not guilty in Jan. 6 case

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump entered pleas of not guilty Thursday at an arraignment in Washington, D.C., giving his formal response to his four-count indictment over his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, including his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

    Trump, the frontrunner in polls for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has denied wrongdoing, and earlier Thursday he continued to criticize the legal proceedings as largely about helping President Joe Biden, a Democrat, in next year’s election.

    “The Dems don’t want to run against me or they would not be doing this unprecedented weaponization of ‘Justice.’ BUT SOON, IN 2024, IT WILL BE OUR TURN,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform.

    In Tuesday’s 45-page indictment, Trump was hit with charges that included conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.

    Related: Bill Barr says Jan. 6 indictment is ‘legitimate’ and that Trump knew he lost the election

    The former president’s appearance in Washington is just one step in a legal battle that will likely take months or even years to play out.

    Special counsel Jack Smith on Tuesday said his office “will seek a speedy trial” in the Jan. 6 case, but Trump defense attorney John Lauro has pushed back repeatedly on Smith’s statement, telling NPR on Wednesday that his side wants “a just trial, not simply a speedy trial,” and that the trial itself “could last six months or nine months or even a year.”

    Trump’s legal team looks likely to make change-of-venue requests, with the former president talking up West Virginia in a Truth Social post late Wednesday. He said the Jan. 6 case “will hopefully be moved to an impartial Venue, such as the politically unbiased nearby State of West Virginia! IMPOSSIBLE to get a fair trial in Washington, D.C., which is over 95% anti-Trump.”

    The next hearing in the case was reportedly scheduled for Aug. 28, which would be five days after the first GOP presidential primary debate.

    Trump also entered pleas of not guilty earlier this year in a Manhattan case over hush-money payments and in a Miami case over classified documents. Another investigation, in Georgia’s Fulton County, centers on efforts by Trump and his allies to undo that state’s 2020 election result. The county prosecutor said over the weekend that she will announce charging decisions by Sept. 1 in that probe.

    Biden told CNN Thursday that he was not planning to follow Trump’s arraignment, responding with an emphatic “no” when asked about it during a bike ride in Rehoboth Beach, Del., where he is vacationing this week.

    Now read: ‘You’re too honest’: Donald Trump’s alleged Jan. 6 conspiracies, explained

    And see: Trump indictment: What does arraignment mean, and what happens next?

    Plus: How DeSantis is leading Trump in cash on hand, even as the former president dominates in polls

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘You’re too honest’: Donald Trump’s alleged Jan. 6 conspiracies, explained

    ‘You’re too honest’: Donald Trump’s alleged Jan. 6 conspiracies, explained

    [ad_1]

    Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence and three times is a conspiracy.

    Former President Donald Trump is accused by federal prosecutors of engaging in three major conspiracies ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot to subvert the process of counting and certifying the vote before Congress in his bid to hold on to power despite having lost the 2020 election.

    While spreading lies about how votes had been illegally cast, tampered with or miscounted in order to build mistrust among the public about the election’s outcome, special counsel Jack Smith says Trump and a group of six unnamed lawyers and advisers plotted to illegally meddle with the very basis of how presidential elections have been run in the U.S since its founding.

    A four-count indictment unsealed in federal court in Washington on Tuesday alleges that the group worked unrelentingly to tamper with how several states counted their ballots and the process by which states sent electors to Washington to finalize their vote. The indictment also accused Trump of pressuring the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to intervene even though they had no standing to do so.   

    “Each of theses conspiracies — which built upon the widespread mistrust the defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing about election fraud — targeted a bedrock function of the United States federal government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election,” the indictment read.

    Trump has dismissed the charges as being purely politicized.

    “The lawlessness of these persecutions of President Trump and his supporters is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s, the former Soviet Union, and other authoritarian, dictatorial regimes,” a statement released by his campaign read. “President Trump has always followed the law and the constitution, with advice from many highly accomplished attorneys.”

    The charges allege three acts of conspiracy and one of obstructing an official proceeding. Here are the main legal arguments Smith makes against the former president:

    ‘We have lots of theories’

    Prosecutors say that starting almost immediately after the election on Nov. 3, 2020, Trump began a campaign to get officials in key states like Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia to overturn the election results.

    Trump pressured state officials to throw the vote out based on allegations ranging from dead people voting to non-citizens casting ballots, and from voting machines being tampered to ballot-box stuffing, despite there being no evidence any of it had occurred. 

    “We don’t have evidence, but we have lots of theories,” one of Trump’s co-conspirators allegedly told the speaker of the house of Arizona, a Trump-backer, when asked what proof they had about electoral malfeasance.

    When officials in the states refused to go along with Trump’s request to decertify the results, the president continued to publicly trumpet false claims about voter fraud and attack local officials as “terrible people” who were in on the fraud, the indictment said.

    Smith said that Trump continued to make the claims despite having been told repeatedly by numerous people in multiple agencies — many of them his own supporters — that there was no truth to it and having lost case after case in court. 

    “When our research and campaign team can’t back up any of the claims made by our Elite Strike Force Legal Team, you can see why we’re 0-32 on our cases,” one senior campaign advisor said, according to the indictment. “It’s tough to own any of this when it’s all just conspiracy s*** beamed down from the mothership.”

    Smith argues that this effort amounted to using deceit to subvert the election’s result, which is against the law. 

    Phony electors

    One key component of the conspiracy case against Trump revolves around efforts to create a competing slate of electors from each challenged state.

    As part of the presidential electoral process, every state sends electors to Washington to deliver the vote to congress. It’s a mostly ceremonial procedure, but Trump’s legal team is accused of hatching a plot to send a second group of electors who backed Trump from several states in order to create confusion in Congress and force legislators in Washington to have to debate the election’s outcome.  

    No matter that the second slate of electors hadn’t been approved by officials in the states they purported to represent and were not authorized in any way, the indictment says. The effort was so patently bogus that Trump’s team even referred to the group as “phony electors” in their own correspondence, the indictment stated. 

    In the indictment, Smith said the effort amounted to a conspiracy to commit fraud.  

    ‘You’re too honest’

    A third leg of the conspiracy allegedly involved pressuring officials at the Justice Department and Pence to intervene in the election even though they had no standing to do so.  

    The indictment says Trump and his co-conspirators repeatedly communicated with then acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen and insisted that he declare ahead of the Jan. 6 certification of the election by Congress that there had been evidence of fraud.

    When Rosen said he would not do that because there was no such evidence, Trump allegedly threatened to replace him with one of the unnamed co-conspirators included in the indictment. 

    At one point, a deputy White House counsel told the co-conspirator that “there is no world, there is no option in  which you do not leave the White House,” and warned that there would be “riots in the streets” if Trump attempted to remain in office, to which the co-conspirator allegedly said: “That’s why there is an Insurrection Act.”

    For weeks ahead of the Jan. 6 certification hearing in Congress, Trump and his cohorts pressured Pence to refuse to certify the vote tally, a purely ceremonial task the vice president has presided over since the country’s founding. 

    Pence steadfastly refused to do so, saying his legal team had told him there was no constitutional basis for the vice president to be able to overturn an election at the last minute. In a phone call less than a week before Jan. 6, Trump allegedly berated Pence and told him, “You’re too honest.”

    When a senior White House advisor told one of the unnamed co-conspirators that if Pence tried to overturn the election it would lead to violence in the streets, the co-conspirator allegedly said that there had been times in the country’s history where violence was necessary to protect the Republic, the indictment said.

    In the days and hours leading up to the Jan. 6 riot, Trump posted several messages on Twitter stating that Pence had the authority to overturn the election and continuing to pressure him to do so. 

    Exploiting the chaos

    On Jan. 6, after Pence issued a statement saying he did not have the authority to not certify the vote, protests outside Congress turned violent, with hundreds of rioters clashing with police and storming the building, delaying the proceedings.

    During the standoff, some of Trump’s co-conspirators tried to reach members of Congress and the Senate to convince them to further delay the certifying process in order to buy Trump more time to convince state legislatures to nullify the already-approved votes, the indictment says.

    Later that afternoon, Trump tweeted: “See, this is what happens when they try to steal an election. These people are angry. These people are really angry about it. This is what happens.” 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump indicted by special counsel over efforts to overturn 2020 election

    Trump indicted by special counsel over efforts to overturn 2020 election

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, D.C., in connection with the Justice Department’s probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, including the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

    Special counsel Jack Smith has been examining Trump’s actions leading up to the Jan. 6 attack. On that day, a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building in an attempt to disrupt the congressional certification of the election results.

    In Tuesday’s 45-page indictment, Trump was hit with four charges: conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights.

    “The attack on our nation’s capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” Smith said at a news conference.

    “As described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies — lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the U.S. government, the nation’s process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election.”

    Trump is expected to be arraigned on Thursday in Washington.

    “In this case, my office will seek a speedy trial so that our evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens,” Smith also said.

    The indictment said Trump had six co-conspirators, and it indicated that four of the individuals were attorneys, one was a political consultant and another was a Justice Department official.

    Trump has denied wrongdoing and is the overwhelming favorite in polls for the GOP nomination for the 2024 presidential race, far ahead in a crowded field that includes Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former Vice President Mike Pence, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. The former president on July 18 said he’d gotten a letter informing him he is a target of that probe. He said he anticipated being indicted.

    Read: Trump says he’s a target of special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 case

    The indictment ratchets up legal pressure for Trump as he seeks the 2024 GOP nomination and aims to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden. The former president is already facing federal charges in Florida that he mishandled classified documents after leaving the White House, and criminal charges in New York over a hush-money case. A separate election-interference investigation is underway in Georgia.

    Read more: Trump has now been indicted in a third case. Here’s where all the investigations stand.

    “This is nothing more than the latest corrupt chapter in the continued pathetic attempt by the Biden crime family and their weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 presidential election, in which President Trump is the undisputed frontrunner, and leading by substantial margins,” said Trump’s 2024 campaign in a statement.

    “The lawlessness of these persecutions of President Trump and his supporters is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s, the former Soviet Union, and other authoritarian, dictatorial regimes,” the statement also said.

    In addition, Trump’s campaign made an effort to raise money off the latest indictment, sending an email from the 45th president that asked supporters to “make a contribution to show that you will NEVER SURRENDER our country to tyranny as the Deep State thugs try to JAIL me for life.”

    Trump’s former vice president, Mike Pence, who’s also seeking the GOP presidential nomination, said in a statement late Tuesday: “Today’s indictment serves as an important reminder: anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States,” adding he will have more to day after reviewing the indictment.

    An indictment does not disqualify Trump from mounting a White House campaign. The only requirements to run for president, as laid out in the Constitution, are being a natural-born citizen at least 35 years old and a resident of the U.S. for 14 years.

    Washington Watch: Donald Trump indicted again. Can he still run for president?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump’s PAC has spent $40 million on legal fees so far this year

    Trump’s PAC has spent $40 million on legal fees so far this year

    [ad_1]

    The Big Number: Former President Donald Trump’s political action committee has spent $40.2 million on legal fees in this year’s first half, according to multiple published reports citing unnamed sources.

    The PAC, called Save America, is expected to disclose the spending in a filing on Monday with the Federal Election Commission.

    What it means: The outlays show the sizable legal challenges that Trump and his associates have been dealing with.

    The 45th president, who has a big lead in polls for the 2024 Republican presidential primary, was indicted in March in a Manhattan case focused on hush-money payments, as well as indicted in June in a Miami case focused on classified documents. In addition, he could get indicted in Washington, D.C., in a case focused on the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and in a separate probe in Georgia’s Fulton County over election interference, and he was found liable in May for sexual abuse in a civil lawsuit.

    What people are saying: Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, an outspoken Trump critic who is seeking the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, criticized their race’s frontrunner for not using his own money for the legal expenses that he and his associates are incurring.

    “He’s making regular Americans pay his legal fees. It’s outrageous,” Christie said over the weekend in a CNN interview.

    But Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told CNN that the spending is needed, saying that “to protect these innocent people from financial ruin and prevent their lives from being completely destroyed, the leadership PAC contributed to their legal fees to ensure they have representation against unlawful harassment.”

    Trump’s team is now setting up a legal defense fund to help handle some of the legal fees, according to other published reports citing unnamed sources.

    Now read: Facing legal peril, Trump calls on Republicans to rally around him as he threatens primary challengers

    And see: Trump and his top 2024 primary rivals mostly ignore new federal charges against him during Iowa GOP event

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump asked staffer to delete Mar-a-Lago camera footage, updated indictment alleges

    Trump asked staffer to delete Mar-a-Lago camera footage, updated indictment alleges

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Donald Trump faced new charges Thursday in a case accusing him of illegally possessing classified documents, with prosecutors alleging that he asked a staffer to delete camera footage at his Florida estate in an effort to obstruct a federal investigation into the records.

    The indictment includes new counts of obstruction and willful retention of national defense information, adding fresh detail to an indictment issued last month against Trump and a close aide. The additional charges came as a surprise at a time of escalating anticipation of a possible additional indictment in Washington over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The updated allegations make clear the vast — and unknown — scope of legal exposure faced by Trump as he seeks to reclaim the White House in 2024 while fending off criminal cases in multiple cities.

    The new allegations from special counsel Jack Smith center on surveillance footage at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, evidence that has long been vital to the case. Trump is alleged to have asked to have the footage deleted after FBI and Justice Department investigators visited in June 2022 to collect classified documents he took with him after leaving the White House. The new indictment also charges him with i llegally holding onto a document he’s alleged to have shown off to visitors in New Jersey.

    A Trump spokesperson dismissed the new charges as “nothing more than a continued desperate and flailing attempt” by the Biden administration “to harass President Trump and those around him” and to influence the 2024 presidential race.

    Prosecutors accuse Trump of scheming with his valet, Walt Nauta, and a Mar-a-Lago property manager, Carlos De Oliveira, to conceal the footage from federal investigators after they issued a subpoena for it. Video from the property would ultimately play a significant role in the investigation because, prosecutors said, it captured Nauta moving boxes of documents in and out of a storage room — including one such incident a day before a Justice Department visit to the property.

    According to the indictment, Nauta met with De Oliveira on June 25, 2022, at Mar-a-Lago, where they went to a security guard booth where surveillance video was displayed on monitors and walked with a flashlight through a tunnel where the storage room was located, observing and pointing out surveillance cameras.

    Two days later, according to the indictment, De Oliveira walked with an unidentified Trump employee to an audio room, where De Oliveira asked how many days the server retained footage.

    De Oliveira, prosecutors said, told the other employee “that ‘the boss’ wanted the server deleted” and asked, “What are we going to do?”

    During a voluntary interview with the FBI last January, prosecutors say, De Oliveira lied when he said he “never saw nothing” with regard to boxes at Mar-a-Lago.

    De Oliveira was added to the indictment, charged with obstruction and false statements related to an interview he gave the FBI earlier this year. His lawyer declined to comment Thursday evening.

    The new charges were filed as Trump is bracing for the prospect of charges related to his efforts to undo the 2020 election in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Last week, he revealed he had received a letter from the Justice Department informing him he was a target in that probe, suggesting that charges could be forthcoming, and his lawyers met with prosecutors on Smith’s office earlier Thursday to discuss that case.

    But despite the anticipation. the only charges filed Thursday were in Florida, not Washington.

    The superseding indictment also charges Trump with an additional count of willfully retaining national defense information, relating to a document he showed off to visitors at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club during an July 2021 interview for a memoir by his onetime chief of staff Mark Meadows. Prosecutors have described the document as a Pentagon plan of attack and Meadows, in his subsequent book, said the country it concerned was Iran.

    According to the indictment, Trump returned that document, which was marked as top secret and not approved to show to foreign nationals, to the federal government on Jan. 17, 2022.

    Trump has denied he had secret documents before him when he spoke.

    “There wasn’t a document. I had lots of paper. I had copies of newspaper articles, I had copies of magazines, I had copies of everything,” he said in an interview with Fox News host Bret Baier.

    The count was notable because prosecutors until now had mostly been focused on the records that Trump had refused to return in response to a Justice Department subpoena last year.

    Both Trump and Nauta have pleaded not guilty to the original 38-count indictment. De Oliveira is due in court in Florida on Monday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden would beat Trump even if a third-party candidate joins White House race: poll

    Biden would beat Trump even if a third-party candidate joins White House race: poll

    [ad_1]

    Voters are more interested in another Joe Biden administration than any third-party option or Donald Trump in 2024, according to polling data from Monmouth University.

    In another Biden vs. Trump election, a combined 47% of voters say they would definitely or probably vote for President Biden and 40% of voters would definitely or probably vote for ex-President Trump. But majorities would not vote for either Biden or Trump, the poll found.

    The electorate is seemingly disheartened with these two choices, but they’re not exactly enticed by a third-party option, either.

    Biden still had more support than Trump, even when a third-party “fusion ticket” with one Democrat and one Republican was added to the mix, Monmouth found.

    With a fusion ticket as an option, 37% of respondents would definitely or probably vote for Biden whereas 28% would definitely or probably vote for Trump. Thirty percent of respondents would entertain voting for the fusion ticket.

    Democrats have expressed concern that a third-party ticket would siphon votes from Biden and spoil his chances in 2024. The presence of a third-party fusion ticket detracts votes from both Biden and Trump, but not enough for the ticket to be a “spoiler,” the polling report said.

    Support for a fusion option declines when actual candidates are named on the ticket.

    When the poll introduced a potential ticket of Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and Republican former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, 44% of respondents definitely would not vote for the option. Only 2% of respondents definitely would vote for the hypothetical Manchin-Huntsman ticket.

    Manchin and Huntsman headlined a town hall on Monday hosted by the nonprofit No Labels, which is pursuing ballot access to enter a “unity” ticket, similar to the Monmouth poll’s fusion ticket, in the 2024 race. The event heightened speculation that Manchin could have presidential aspirations for 2024.

    Read: Sen. Joe Manchin fuels rumors of a third-party 2024 presidential bid

    If 2024 turns out to be a Biden vs. Trump vs. Manchin-Huntsman race, Biden would likely get 40% of the vote, Trump 34% and Manchin-Huntsman 16%, the poll found.

    “Some voters clearly feel they have to back a candidate they don’t really like. That suggests there may be an opening for a third party in 2024, but when you drill down further, there doesn’t seem to be enough defectors to make that a viable option,” Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth Polling Institute, said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mike Pence says inflation is 16%, but CPI is 3%. This is his logic.

    Mike Pence says inflation is 16%, but CPI is 3%. This is his logic.

    [ad_1]

    Former Vice President Mike Pence is taking a long view when it comes to inflation — a very long view that isn’t commonly expressed when debating economic performance.

    Pence — well behind former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in early polling for the Republican nomination — is trying to position himself as the true conservative alternative in the Republican presidential race, and used inflation as a key talking point.

    Pence was interviewed by Larry Kudlow, another former Trump administration official, on Fox Business, and stated the following about inflation:

    “We’ve got to end this scourge of inflation on families,” he said Monday. “We’re still 16% inflation in the last two and a half years and that also means another issue I’ve been willing to tackle, Larry, is we’ve got to bring common-sense and compassionate reforms to entitlements.”

    The 16% figure cited by Pence seemed to be at odds with other measures of inflation. The Labor Department reported consumer prices rose 3% year-over-year in June. The peak for the CPI series was 9%. There’s no metric — core CPI, PCE, Cleveland Fed median CPI — that got close to 16%.

    The Pence campaign told MarketWatch they were comparing June 2023 with Jan. 2021 — when President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris came into office, for a 16.6% rise.

    They also provided a similar comparison for inflation during the Trump/Pence administration — over those four years, prices grew by a smaller 7.7%.

    But then, if that’s the new way of calculating things, there’s all sorts of data that also should be compared to 29 months ago.

    To name a few: there’s been a 9% increase in jobs compared to 29 months ago, compared to the 2% drop during the Trump administration.

    Average hourly earnings compared to 29 months ago have climbed 12%.

    Durable-goods orders are up by 23% compared to 29 months ago, and retail sales have grown by 21%.

    Comparing inflation now to 29 months ago isn’t wrong, but is misleading when the overwhelming percentage of listeners assume that comparison to be done over 12 months.

    It’s an adjustment of inflation data that landed President Biden in hot water last year, when he used month-by-month data — instead of the more commonly used year-over-year data — to say that inflation was zero.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NATO chief says Erdoğan has agreed to put Swedish accession protocol to the Turkish parliament soon

    NATO chief says Erdoğan has agreed to put Swedish accession protocol to the Turkish parliament soon

    [ad_1]

    VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) — NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has agreed to send Sweden’s NATO accession protocol to the Turkish parliament “as soon as possible.”

    Stoltenberg made the announcement after talks with Erdoğan and Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson on the eve of the annual NATO summit. Leaders of alliance member states formally convene on Tuesday in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius.

    Context: NATO leaders gather in Lithuania with wary eyes on not only Russia but Belarus — and Ukraine’s and Sweden’s alliance candidacies on table

    From the archives (June 2023): U.S. and allies increase pressure on Turkey to back Swedish accession to NATO after Erdoğan’s re-election

    Sweden’s NATO accession has been held up by objections from Turkey since last year. The governments in Stockholm and Helsinki had initially indicated that their bids to join the alliance could be considered in essence a package deal. Finland ultimately shifted gears and joined this spring while Sweden worked to overcome Erdoğan’s reservations amid hope that they might melt away following his re-election bid.

    From the archives (June 2023): Turkey’s Erdoğan takes oath of office after re-election deemed free if not fair by outside observers

    As Sweden waits for NATO to approve its membership, WSJ’s Sune Engel Rasmussen explains what the country can bring to the alliance and why Turkey and Hungary are blocking its application. Photo Composition: Marina Costa

    Prior to traveling to Vilnius, Erdoğan appeared to have introduced a new condition for approving Sweden’s membership in NATO, calling on European countries to “open the way” for Turkey to join the European Union.

    The surprise announcement by Erdoğan before departing for a NATO summit in Lithuania’s capital added new uncertainty to Sweden’s bid to become the Atlantic alliance’s 32nd member.

    Erdoğan has blocked Sweden’s NATO path for months, rationalizing his position by arguing Sweden was soft on Kurdish militants and other groups that Ankara considers security threats. Protests in Sweden involving the burning of the Quran have also been cited.

    Erdoğan, alongside Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, is considered significantly friendlier than any other head of government or state in a NATO member country toward Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    Erdoğan had not previously, at least in public, linked his country’s ambition to join the EU with Sweden’s effort to become a NATO member.

    “Turkey has been waiting at the door of the European Union for over 50 years now, and almost all of the NATO member countries are now members of the European Union,” Erdoğan told reporters in Istanbul. “I am making this call to these countries that have kept Turkey waiting at the gates of the European Union for more than 50 years.”

    Erdoğan’s office had said previously that the Turkish leader told U.S. President Joe Biden during a telephone call Sunday that Turkey wanted a “clear and strong” message of support for Turkey’s EU ambitions from the NATO leaders. The White House readout of the Biden-Erdoğan call did not mention the issue of Turkish EU membership.

    MarketWatch contributed.

    Read on:

    NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg says during Kyiv visit that Ukraine’s rightful place is in the Atlantic alliance

    Failed Russian mutiny presents ‘window of opportunity’ for Ukraine’s accession to NATO, says top Zelensky adviser

    Neutral Switzerland and Austria express interest in joining Europe defense initiative called overreliant on U.S. by France’s Macron

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FDA approves Alzheimer’s treatment Leqembi, clearing the way for Medicare coverage

    FDA approves Alzheimer’s treatment Leqembi, clearing the way for Medicare coverage

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday granted full approval to the Biogen BIIB and Eisai Co. Ltd. ESALF Alzheimer’s treatment Leqembi, a step that secures Medicare reimbursement for the first drug shown to slow the progress of the disease, rather than just treating its symptoms.

    Leqembi, also known as lecanemab, is a monoclonal antibody designed to reduce the buildup of amyloid beta plaque in the brain, a marker of Alzheimer’s disease.

    The…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s age is figuring ‘prominently’ in the 2024 White House race — but here’s what the pundits could be getting wrong

    Biden’s age is figuring ‘prominently’ in the 2024 White House race — but here’s what the pundits could be getting wrong

    [ad_1]

    As the 2024 race for the White House gathers steam, one topic that just won’t go away is President Joe Biden’s age.

    It comes up whenever the 80-year-old president makes a mistake such as saying “Iraq” when he means to say “Ukraine,” as occurred twice last week, or when he takes a tumble, such as his trip over a sandbag at the Air Force Academy’s commencement on June 1. Biden later joked that he “got sandbagged.”

    The…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Supreme Court blocked student-loan cancellation. Here’s what happens next for your loans.

    The Supreme Court blocked student-loan cancellation. Here’s what happens next for your loans.

    [ad_1]

    Student-loan payments are poised to resume this fall without smaller balances now that the U.S. Supreme Court has blocked President Joe Biden’s loan cancellation plan.

    The Biden administration’s loan forgiveness initiative would have canceled up to $10,000 of debt for eligible borrowers, and in some cases up to $20,000.

    But the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled on Friday that the executive branch overstepped its authority by trying to wipe out billions in student loan debt on its own.

    “Six States sued, arguing that the HEROES Act does not authorize the loan cancellation plan. We agree,” Chief Judge John Roberts said, writing for the 6-3 majority.

    Now it’s time for more than 40 million borrowers with federal student loans to figure out their next move. They are staring at more than $1.6 trillion in student loan debt. Add on private student loans, and the number climbs to $1.7 trillion.

    Federal student loan payments have been on hold since March 2020.

    On Friday, the Department of Education filed notice saying it would embark on a regulatory process that would seek an alternative pathway to student-debt relief. Activists have focused on a provision in the Higher Education Act, allowing the Department of Education to “compromise, waive, or release,” any right to collect on student loans. 

    Approximately 26 million people had either applied for loan forgiveness or were already eligible for the relief as of late last year, the  White House said.

    Here’s what to know.

    When do student-loan payments restart?

    In October, according to the Department of Education. Expect more specifics soon on those payments. “We will notify borrowers well before payments restart,” the department said.

    While payments start coming in October, interest starts accumulating on the loans in September. Loan balances have not been accumulating interest since the payment pause started in March 2020, during the pandemic’s early days.

    “We will also be in direct touch with borrowers and ramping up our communications with servicers well before repayment resumes to ensure borrowers and their families are receiving accurate and timely information about the return to repayment,” an Education Department spokesperson said.

    There’s a range of estimates on how much student-loan borrowers typically pay each month on their loans.

    According to Bank of America data, $180 was the median monthly student-loan payment as of January 2020. Federal Reserve research before the pause said the average monthly payment was $393, while the median payment was $222.

    Can I lower my payments?

    Possibly yes, with a range of income-driven repayment plans through the Education Department. These plans are supposed to make repaying loans more affordable by letting borrowers modify their monthly payments based on their income.

    While these plans already exist, the department is reworking them. As a result, more monthly income will be shielded from the calculations on what a person could repay for student loans each month, meaning payments will become more affordable. While the revised plans are not in effect yet, the existing plans are up and running.

    Many people will likely struggle to fit a student-loan bill back into their budget — the question is how far that financial hardship will go. Student-loan payments would be hitting at a time when car loan and credit-card delinquencies are already rising from their pandemic lows, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

    Part of the Biden administration’s Supreme Court arguments pointed to the possible economic consequences of resuming student-loan payments without canceling some of the debt.

    Without cancellation, there will be a “surge” of loan defaults and delinquencies once payments resume, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the justices during oral arguments earlier this year.

    Analysts at Bank of America agree more delinquencies are coming once student loan payments resume.

    What if I miss my first payment?

    When deciding which debts have to get paid first, a student-loan bill might fall behind other monthly debts like a mortgage or a credit-card bill.

    Anywhere from roughly one-third to three-quarters of borrowers could miss their first student-loan bill when payments resume, according to projections from the credit score company VantageScore.

    A missed first payment — in theory — could eventually lead to an average 49- to 82-point reduction in a credit score ranging from 350 to 850, VantageScore researchers said.

    However, President Biden on Friday announced a temporary “ramp-up” — a 12-month grace period for borrowers who miss student-loan payments. If borrowers miss payments during this time, they won’t be reported to any of three main credit bureaus — Equifax 
    EFX,
    +0.37%
    ,
     TransUnion 
    TRU,
    +1.06%

     and Experian
    EXPGF,
    +0.80%

     — and they won’t go into default.

    The ramp-up will run from Oct. 1, 2023 through Sept. 30, 2024. 

    “This is not the same as the student-loan pause, but during this period — if you miss payments — this ‘on ramp’ will temporarily remove the threat of default or having your credit harmed,” Biden wrote in a tweet Friday.

    Prior to the payment pause and Biden’s ramp-up announcement, loan servicers waited for a borrower to miss three straight payments before they reported it to the credit reporting bureaus, according to Scott Buchanan, executive director of the Student Loan Servicing Alliance.

    In the meantime, brace for potentially long call hold times, curtailed hours and loan servicer glitches, borrower advocates say. It stems back to Congressional cuts on the funding for vendor contracts that handle the day-to-day details of student-loan repayments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court knocks down Biden’s student-debt forgiveness plan

    Supreme Court knocks down Biden’s student-debt forgiveness plan

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court knocked down the Biden administration’s plan to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for a wide swath of borrowers, the court announced Friday. 

    The decision means that the White House won’t move forward with the plan for now, though it’s possible officials could try to launch a new version of the debt-forgiveness initiative using a different legal authority. Roughly 26 million borrowers applied for or were automatically eligible for debt relief under the Biden administration’s plan, which canceled up to $10,000 in student debt for borrowers earning less than $125,000 and up to $20,000 in federal loans for borrowers who met that criteria and also used a Pell grant in college. 

    Americans owe $1.7 trillion of student loans and the White House had estimated that more than 40 million borrowers would benefit from the initiative. But almost as soon as the Biden administration announced the debt-forgiveness plan last year, opponents looked for ways to challenge it legally. Ultimately, two cases made it to the high court. 

    In one case, two student-loan borrowers sued over the debt-relief plan in part because the Department of Education didn’t submit it for public comment. That, they said, resulted in an initiative that arbitrarily left out or limited the amount of relief available to some student loan borrowers, like themselves. The suit filed by the borrowers was backed by the Job Creators Network, a conservative advocacy organization co-founded by Bernard Marcus, the co-founder of Home Depot, who also supported former President Donald Trump. 

    Six Republican-led states brought the other case on the basis that canceling debt could harm their state coffers. 

    The court considered two issues in these cases. The first is whether the plaintiffs had standing, or the ability to bring a lawsuit because they’ve been directly harmed by the policy. The second is whether the Biden administration overstepped in its executive authority when issuing the policy. In order for the justices to reach the second issue, or the merits of the case, they had to find that the plaintiffs had standing to sue. 

    Legal experts, including some who believed the Biden administration didn’t have the authority to authorize the debt-relief plan, were skeptical of the notion that the parties bringing the cases had standing to sue. During oral arguments in February, the court’s three liberal justices also questioned whether the parties who challenged debt forgiveness were actually injured by the policy. 

    In addition, one of the members of the court’s conservative wing, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, asked pointed questions about the six states’ argument that they had standing to sue in part because the debt-relief plan would injure the state of Missouri. That claim surrounded the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, or MOHELA, a state-affiliated organization that services federal student loans. The states had argued if MOHELA lost accounts due to the debt-relief plan, its revenue would decline and that loss would hurt Missouri because of MOHELA’s ties to the state. 

    Despite these questions, Barrett agreed with the court’s five other conservative judges and found that the states have standing to sue. The three liberal justices dissented.

    “MOHELA is, by law and function, an instrumentality of Missouri,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “It was created by the State, is supervised by the State, and serves a public function. The harm to MOHELA in the performance of its public function is necessarily a direct injury to Missouri itself.”

    The court’s decision in the states’ suit allowed the justices to get to the merits of the case. The parties challenging the debt-relief plan argued that the Department of Education went beyond the authority Congress delegated it in discharging student debt. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued to the justices that in canceling student debt, the Secretary of Education acted “within the heartland” of the authority Congress provided to him under the HEROES Act, a 2003 law that aims to ensure student-loan borrowers aren’t left worse off by a national emergency. 

    The court’s conservative majority sided with the states, with a 6-3 decision, striking down the debt-relief plan in its current form. 

    “The HEROES Act allows the Secretary to ‘waive or modify’ existing statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to financial assistance programs under the Education Act, but does not allow the Secretary to rewrite that statute to the extent of canceling $430 billion of student loan principal,” Roberts wrote.

    In the months leading up to the court’s decision, White House officials said there was no backup plan for if the Supreme Court knocked down the debt-forgiveness initiative. Advocates and activists have said that student-loan repayments shouldn’t resume until the Biden administration fulfills its promise to cancel some student debt.

    The bill President Joe Biden signed in June to raise the nation’s debt limit requires that the Department of Education end the pause on federal student loan, interest payments and collections 60 days after June 30, 2023. Interest on federal student loans will resume starting September 1 and payments will start to come due in October, according to the Department’s website.

    Advocates and activists have said for years that the Higher Education Act provides the Secretary of Education with the authority to discharge student loans. In ruling that the HEROES Act didn’t authorize the Biden administration’s debt-relief plan, the court left the option open for the Biden administration to create a loan-forgiveness program authorized under the HEA. 

    The court’s decision marks the latest development in a more-than-decade-long push to get the government to cancel student debt en masse. The idea, which has its origins in the Occupy Wall Street movement, made it to the presidential campaign stage during the 2020 cycle and was adopted by the White House last year.    

    Proponents of student debt cancellation and the Biden administration, have expressed concern that without some kind of relief a large swath of borrowers could slip into delinquency and default with the return of student loan payments later this year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link