Harris&Ewing House-Capitol tunnel, Washington, DC Feb 3 1939
Still a shallow loss. But 1980 seems a distant memory.
The S&P 500 ended lower on Friday for a ninth straight day, the longest losing streak for the benchmark index in more than 35 years, as investors stayed on edge ahead of an uncertain U.S. election. The Nasdaq also ended lower for a ninth-consecutive session, while the Dow industrials closed down for a seventh straight day. Investors have been unnerved by signs of a tightening presidential race between Clinton and Trump. Clinton had been thought to have a clear lead until the re-emergence last week of a controversy over her use of a private email server while secretary of state. “Investors are uncertain about the outcome of the election, and they have grown more uncertain since last Friday,” said Walter Todd, CIO with Greenwood Capital.
The Dow Jones industrial average fell 42.39 points, or 0.24%, to 17,888.28, the S&P 500 lost 3.48 points, or 0.17%, to 2,085.18 and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 12.04 points, or 0.24%, to 5,046.37. Despite the historic run, the S&P has pulled back by only about 3.1% over that time. For the year, the index is up 2%. It was the 14th time since 1928 that the S&P 500 had declined for nine sessions in a row, according to S&P Dow Jones Indices. On Friday, Wall Street had posted solid gains as of the afternoon, spurred by a strong U.S. employment report, but then lost steam and sold off into the close.
“Obviously the big concern this week has been the shift in the polls in the election. We did have a bounce for a period of time, but when it didn’t hold and people just decided to liquidate going into the close to reduce exposure in case any more news hits over the weekend,” said Michael O’Rourke, chief market strategist at JonesTrading in Greenwich, Connecticut. “There’s a lot of headline risk out there.”
“..the four horsemen of the Fed’s wealth creation bubble…”
In the last week the so-called FANG stocks (FB, AMZN, NFLX, GOOGL) have stumbled. As earnings and outlooks disappointed, shareholders have awoken to the new normal low growth world and wiped over $100 bilion in market capitalization of the four horsemen of the Fed’s wealth creation bubble. FANGs are now down 8 days in a row…
Losing a massive $108 billion in that time…
This is the biggest drop since the February growth scare – which was only saved by massive coordinated global central bank money-printing… which is simply not about to happen this time.
The only stat from the BLS report that tells a real story.
On the surface, the establishment survey print of 161K jobs was just good enough when taking into account the 44,000 in upward revisions to August and September jobs. However, the household survey was less impressive, with the number of workers employed declining by 43,000 to 151,925 even as the number of persons unemployed declined from 7,939K to 7,787K.
So how did the unemployment rate drop? Because contrary to expectations that people are rushing back into the labor force, in October the number of Americans who were not in the labor force rose by a substantial 425,000 to 94,609, the highest print in the series since May, and suggests that the exodus of Americans out of the labor force has resumed.
Civilized society attacked from all sides.
Theresa May’s government has been accused of failing to restrain the furious backlash against this week’s high court judgment about article 50, as one of her own MPs resigned, stepping up the political pressure as she battles to stick to her Brexit timetable. Stephen Phillips, the MP for Sleaford and North Hykeham in Lincolnshire, stepped down on Friday with immediate effect. He was unhappy that the government had not planned to consult parliament before triggering article 50 – the issue that led to Thursday’s ruling. Former ministers warned that the febrile tone of media coverage, which included the judges who ruled against the government being condemned as “enemies of the people” by the Daily Mail, risked poisoning public debate.
Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, said reading hostile coverage in the Mail and the Daily Telegraph “started to make one think that one was living in Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe .. I think there’s a danger of a sort of mob psyche developing – and mature democracies should take sensible steps to avoid that”. Labour also raised concerns about the absence of a ministerial response to the media coverage. Lord Falconer, who was lord chancellor under Labour between 2003 and 2007, said faith in the “independence and quality” of the judiciary was being undermined “by this Brexit-inspired media vitriol” in an article written for the Guardian. Jeremy Corbyn will accuse the government of opposing democratic scrutiny because “frankly, there aren’t any plans, beyond the hollow rhetoric of Brexit means Brexit”.
In a speech on Saturday, the Labour leader will say: “Thursday’s high court decision underlines the necessity that the prime minister brings the government’s negotiating terms for Brexit to parliament without delay. “Labour accepts and respects the decision of the British people to leave the European Union. But there must be transparency and accountability to parliament about the government’s plans.” May called European leaders to tell them again that she would meet her self-imposed deadline and trigger article 50 by the end of March 2017, despite losing the high court case. The prime minister otherwise refused to be drawn into the row. Her spokesman refused to condemn the media coverage on Friday, saying: “I don’t think the British judiciary is being undermined.” But the pro-remain former business minister Anna Soubry told the Guardian: “I think we have to call this out and say ‘not in my name’.”
“..Trump will not be permitted to win..”
Wealthy officials from Qatar and Saudi Arabia who donated money to Hillary Clinton’s charitable foundation also provided financial support to Isis, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has claimed. In an extended interview at the Ecuadorian embassy in London with documentary maker John Pilger for RT, Mr Assange said the same Saudi and Qatari officials could be seen to be supporting both the Clinton Foundation – founded by Mrs Clinton’s husband Bill – and funding the activities of Isis. Mr Pilger asked if Mr Assange believed that “this notorious jihadist group, called Isil or Isis, is created largely with money from people who are giving money to the Clinton Foundation” “Yes,” Mr Assange replied.
The WikiLeaks founder pointed to an email exchange between presidential hopeful Ms Clinton and her campaign manager John Podesta, leaked by his organisation last month, which he believes “is the most significant email in the whole collection”. In the email sent on August 17 2014, Ms Clinton asked Mr Podesta, who at that time worked under president Barack Obama, to help put “pressure” on Qatar and Saudi Arabia regarding the countries’ alleged support for the terrorist group Isis. “We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to Isil and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” Ms Clinton wrote.
Mr Assange noted the US government had never acknowledged governments of Middle East nations had financially supported Isis, instead arguing such support was isolated to “some rogue princes using their cut of the oil money to do whatever they like, although the government disapproves”, according to the WikiLeaks founder. According to the Clinton Foundation, the Saudi Arabian government has donated between $10m (£8m) and $25million since the foundation was set up in 1997. Last month it was reported the government of Qatar offered to donate $1m to the foundation in celebration of Bill Clinton’s birthday. Representatives from the Clinton Foundation have repeatedly denied accusations Ms Clinton has solicited funds and used donations to boost her campaign.
There were no donations from Saudi Arabia while she was acting as secretary of state between 2009 and 2013. Mr Assange also used the interview to dismiss the prospect of a Donald Trump victory in next week’s election, which the polls show will be close. “My analysis is that Trump will not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment against him. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.”
“..51% saying she did something illegal..” “..Just 26% think he’s done something illegal..”
A majority of voters believe Hillary Clinton has done something illegal, according to a new McClatchy-Marist Poll days before the presidential election. A total of 83% of likely voters believe that Clinton did something wrong – 51% saying she did something illegal and 32% saying she something unethical but not illegal. Just 14% said she’s done nothing wrong. By comparison, 79% think Donald Trump did something wrong, though not nearly as many think he did something illegal. Just 26% think he’s done something illegal, while 53% think he’s dome something unethical but not illegal. Just 17% think he’s done nothing wrong. The deep suspicion of Clinton is likely a top reason she’s lost much of her lead and the race for the White House has tightened in the race’s closing days.
In a four-way race, the two are neck and neck with Clinton supported by 44% and Trump by 43%. Libertarian Gary Johnson has 6%, and the Green Party’s Jill Stein has 2%. In a two-way match up, Clinton has 46%, Trump 44%. Both candidates are disliked. Clinton gets a favorable rating from just 40% while 57% have unfavorable views of her. Voters have a 61% to 36% unfavorable-favorable rating of Trump. “This is practically off the charts,” said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion in New York, which conducted the nationwide survey. “You have candidates coming before the electorate with enormous baggage.”
Even 57% of those who are supporting Trump and 58% of Republicans think he acted unethically. 55% of voters said the accusations against Trump would make a difference in how they vote. At the same time stories about the FBI inquiry may have raised more suspicion about Clinton, they also may have energized the vote for Trump. The poll shows Trump gaining support among Republicans, as running mate Mike Pence and others have urged GOP voters in recent weeks to “come home.” Trump enters the final weekend with the support of 92% of Republicans. That’s more than Clinton, who has 89% support of Democrats.
The irony of people voting for her because Hillary’s a woman is dazzling given how Qatar thinks about women.
The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments. Qatari officials pledged the money in 2011 to mark the 65th birthday of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton’s husband, and sought to meet the former U.S. president in person the following year to present him the check, according to an email from a foundation official to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign chairman, John Podesta. The email, among thousands hacked from Podesta’s account, was published last month by WikiLeaks. Clinton signed an ethics agreement governing her family’s globe-straddling foundation in order to become secretary of state in 2009.
The agreement was designed to increase transparency to avoid appearances that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by wealthy donors. If a new foreign government wished to donate or if an existing foreign-government donor, such as Qatar, wanted to “increase materially” its support of ongoing programs, Clinton promised that the State Department’s ethics official would be notified and given a chance to raise any concerns. Clinton Foundation officials last month declined to confirm the Qatar donation. In response to additional questions, a foundation spokesman, Brian Cookstra, this week said that it accepted the $1 million gift from Qatar, but this did not amount to a “material increase” in the Gulf country’s support for the charity. Cookstra declined to say whether Qatari officials received their requested meeting with Bill Clinton.
[..] At least eight other countries besides Qatar gave new or increased funding to the foundation, in most cases to fund its health project, without the State Department being informed, according to foundation and agency records. They include Algeria, which gave for the first time in 2010, and the United Kingdom, which nearly tripled its support for the foundation’s health project to $11.2 million between 2009 and 2012. Foundation officials have said some of those donations, including Algeria, were oversights and should have been flagged, while others, such as the UK increase, did not qualify as material increases. The foundation has declined to describe what sort of increase in funding by a foreign government would have triggered notification of the State Department for review.
IRS. New kid on the block.
The internal war we have warned is unfolding with Intelligence and Law Enforcement standing against Obama and the corrupt DOJ under Lynch is really heating up. The FBI realizes that Lynch’s DOJ will protect Hillary at all costs and will never allow her to be criminally charged. They have no choice now but to leak everything they can to show the corruption going on in the Department of Justice (see Daily Mail). There are 650,000+ emails on Weiner’s laptop. Meanwhile, Huma Abedin is preparing for her own criminal changes of obstruction of justice. She did not turn over that laptop when ordered to do so. She is now crying “she doesn’t know how her emails wound up on her husband’s computer” according to the Washington Post. She is saying that and it is not plausible. She had to be using that computer.
Oh she may try to claim that her husband hacked her emails to escape the criminal charges. But that will get really messy. It would also mean there was a MAJOR breach of security. Now the FBI is letting the press know that Clinton’s server was hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies. There are now also two addition investigations into Hillary on that score. State Department has revealed there were 10 attempts to hack Hillary in just 2 days. Let’s face it, if Hillary is elected, she will most likely be IMPEACHED as was her husband, but this time she would be removed. This is not a Monica deal. This election is going down in history as the tipping point for the United States. It has revealed how corrupt Congress really is. We have even former Bush Sr saying he will vote for Hillary.
He just lost all my respect for he has chosen the status quo to save the politicians rather than his country. This is just over the top. Even Podesta began a lobbying firm with his brother, which now collects $120,000 PER MONTH in a fee from Saudi Arabia. Hillary has tried to slander Assange saying all these hacks came from Russia. Assange has come out and bluntly said the hacked Clinton emails didn’t come from Russia government. They may be coming from sources inside the USA. Do not forget, to my surprise, there is one source that has EVERYTHING. Hello – NSA! Anyone remember they are storing everyone’s emails, text messages, and phone calls? Nobody want to order the NSA to turn it all over because it will reveal treason, where Hillary took money from foreign government and they approved arms deals.
If Hillary is elected, it will be by rigging the election. Our computer has NEVER been wrong on this score. So if she takes office, this will be the worst administration in history and may very will set in motion the phase transition where capital flees to bonds and we see a significant rise in civil unrest.
Say a prayer, light a candle.
An attorney for Chelsea Manning says the transgender soldier imprisoned in Kansas has tried to kill herself for the second time in recent months. Vincent Ward said Friday that Manning attempted suicide last month at the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, though the attorney declined to divulge specifics. Manning also tried to take her own life in July. Wayne Hall, an Army spokesman, on Friday would not discuss the latest attempt, citing medical privacy laws. Manning is serving a 35-year sentence. She was arrested in 2010 as Bradley Manning and was convicted in 2013 in military court of leaking more than 700,000 secret military and State Department documents to WikiLeaks. Manning was an intelligence analyst in Iraq at the time.
[..] three major events prove how widespread, and dangerous, mass surveillance has become in the west. Standing alone, each event highlights exactly the severe threats which motivated Edward Snowden to blow his whistle; taken together, they constitute full-scale vindication of everything he’s done. Earlier this month, a special British court that rules on secret spying activities issued an emphatic denunciation of the nation’s domestic mass surveillance programs. The court found that “British security agencies have secretly and unlawfully collected massive volumes of confidential personal data, including financial information, on citizens for more than a decade.” Those agencies, the court found, “operated an illegal regime to collect vast amounts of communications data, tracking individual phone and web use and other confidential personal information, without adequate safeguards or supervision for 17 years.”
On Thursday, an even more scathing condemnation of mass surveillance was issued by the Federal Court of Canada. The ruling “faulted Canada’s domestic spy agency for unlawfully retaining data and for not being truthful with judges who authorize its intelligence programs.” Most remarkable was that these domestic, mass surveillance activities were not only illegal, but completely unknown to virtually the entire population in Canadian democracy, even though their scope has indescribable implications for core liberties: “the centre in question appears to be the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s equivalent of a crystal ball – a place where intelligence analysts attempt to deduce future threats by examining, and re-examining, volumes of data.”
The third scandal also comes from Canada – a critical partner in the Five Eyes spying alliance along with the U.S. and UK – where law enforcement officials in Montreal are now defending “a highly controversial decision to spy on a La Presse columnist [Patrick Lagacé] by tracking his cellphone calls and texts and monitoring his whereabouts as part of a necessary internal police investigation.” The targeted journalist, Lagacé, had enraged police officials by investigating their abusive conduct, and they then used surveillance technology to track his calls and movements to unearth the identity of his sources. Just as that scandal was exploding, it went, in the words of the Montreal Gazette, “from bad to worse” as the ensuing scrutiny revealed that police had actually “tracked the calls and movements of six journalists that year after news reports based on leaks revealed Michel Arsenault, then president of Quebec’s largest labour federation, had his phone tapped.”