Month: June 2024

Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The D.C. Bar’s disciplinary board on Friday recommended disbarring Rudy Giuliani for his involvement in “frivolous” legal efforts to challenge the 2020 election results in Pennsylvania.

The decision, which would see him lose his license to practice law in the District of Columbia, marks another legal blow for the former New York City mayor and attorney for former President Donald Trump, who alleged election fraud following the 2020 election.

In the 63-page report and recommendation, which will require approval from the D.C. Court of Appeals at a forthcoming hearing, the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility severely criticizes Mr. Giuliani’s actions in the report, accusing him of attempting to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvania voters.

The panel found “clear and convincing evidence” that Mr. Giuliani violated two Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct by making “baseless” claims of voter fraud in a federal lawsuit filed in November 2020. The lawsuit claimed that barriers for poll-watchers and “illegal” mail-in ballots were proof of “nationwide voter fraud.”

The report acknowledges that disbarment “has not been imposed in other frivolous litigation cases.” However, it claims that Mr. Giuliani’s efforts can’t be compared and that the “aggravating factors” involved here warrant severe disciplinary action.

“He urged a federal judge to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvania voters even though he had no objectively reliable evidence that any such scheme existed, or even that any illegal mail-in ballots had been counted,” the report states.

“No prior disciplinary cases involving frivolous litigation are remotely comparable to this case,” it continues. “We conclude that disbarment is the only sanction that will protect the public, the courts, and the integrity of the legal profession, and deter other lawyers from launching similarly baseless claims in the pursuit of such wide-ranging yet completely unjustified relief.”

Mail-in ballots increased from just over 266,000 in the 2016 election to more than 2.6 million in the 2020 election. This was due to a 2019 state law and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mr. Giuliani was part of a lawsuit alleging that seven Democrat-majority counties “blatantly violated” election laws and stuffed ballot boxes with illegal votes for then-candidate Joe Biden, a Democrat.

The board criticized Mr. Giuliani for seeking to have a federal court declare the 2020 presidential election in Pennsylvania “defective,” which would enable the state legislature to select electors or, alternatively, enjoin the certification of election results.

The lawsuit focused on two types of allegedly illegal mail-in ballots: those where voters were notified and allowed to cure defects that would stop their ballots from being counted, and those that were canvassed without observation by partisan observers.

“The Hearing Committee concluded that the Notice and Cure claims themselves were not frivolous because they alleged that different counties treated defective ballots differently (some allowed them to be cured, and some did not),” the report states.

“However, the Hearing Committee concluded that Respondent did not have a faint hope of success that the Notice and Cure claims would support the most extreme requested relief, enjoining certification of the election results, because there were not enough cured ballots to change the election results even if all of the cured ballots were deemed to be Biden ballots,” the report continued.

Disbarment Meant to ‘Discourage Lawyers’

A spokesperson for Mr. Giuliani, Ted Goodman, dismissed the recommendation as unsurprising and politically motivated, alleging it was orchestrated by “partisan Democrats” to deter lawyers from representing clients like President Trump.

“Taking away the mayor’s law license is meant to discourage lawyers from representing clients like President Donald Trump or anyone else who is willing to take on the prevailing political establishment,” Mr. Goodman said in a statement to media outlets.

“I call on rank-and-file members of the D.C. Bar Association to speak out against this irresponsible and anti-American recommendation—whether you agree with the mayor’s politics or not,” he continued.

The recommendation and report issued on Friday is the final step before the D.C. Court of Appeals hears arguments ahead of deciding whether to disbar him.

Mr. Giuliani faces multiple legal challenges, including election interference charges in Arizona and his involvement as an unnamed, unindicted co-conspirator in the federal case concerning the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach.

Mr. Giuliani already cannot practice law in New York, as his license was suspended by a state court in 2021 due to the same Pennsylvania lawsuit. Additionally, a smaller disciplinary board for the D.C. Bar recommended last year that he be prohibited from practicing law in Washington.

He is not the first Trump attorney to face the prospect of being disbarred. In March, a California judge recommended that lawyer John Eastman be disbarred for his advice to President Trump in his efforts to challenge the accuracy of the 2020 election results. The recommendation is now pending review by the California Supreme Court, and Mr. Eastman plans to appeal. He has also been suspended from practicing law in the District of Columbia.

The summer travel season is in full swing, with highways jammed and the Transportation Security Administration recently screening a record number of passengers at airport checkpoints. However, as travelers plan their trips, a union representing American Airlines flight attendants warned Friday about a potential strike after the carrier and union failed to reach a deal. 

On Friday evening, aviation watchdog JonNYC posted on X, “Never had this before; four different people just sent me the FA union/strike update within minutes.” Minutes later, he posted a statement from the Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA) asking workers to prepare for strike after contract negotiations with American failed to produce a deal. 

“Two weeks of intensive mediation at the National Mediation Board (NMB) offices in Washington, D.C., failed to produce an agreement with American Airlines. These sessions followed three weeks of mediation in DFW. Per the request of the NMB, we cannot release particular details. We remain apart on the key economics of the deal plus the company’s completely unacceptable demand for scheduling concessions,” APFA wrote. 

Further down, the union warned American flight attendants:

“All Flight Attendants need to prepare for a strike. Strike handbooks will be mailed to your address on file with APFA.” 

Here’s the full memo from APFA: 

There is hope that through NMB, which oversees contract negotiations between both parties, the airline and union can get together for “last ditch” talks in the next two weeks. 

Reuters pointed out, “Flight attendants at United Airlines, Alaska Air group, American Airlines, and Frontier are among employees at more than a dozen airlines still working to reach new contract deals.” 

It was noted from the aviation blog View from the Wing, “American Airlines flight attendants have not gotten a raise since January 1, 2019, and they’ve seen the value of their wages eroded significantly by inflation. Delta and Southwest flight attendants now earn more than they do.” 

Travelers should monitor developments surrounding American and APFA over the next several weeks if they’re traveling to mitigate any disruptions if a deal is not struck in upcoming last-ditch effort talks. 

By Nate Delesline of RetailDive

Vasos said self checkout will remain in a limited number of higher volume stores. He added that the shift away from self checkout will drive increased customer engagement and should position the company to begin reducing “shrink”, aka theft, in the second half of 2024 with a material impact expected in 2025.

“Shrink continues to be the most significant headwind in our business,” Vasos said, addressing soaring retail theft.

In addition to cutting self-checkouts, Vasos said the company’s supply chain teams are also addressing shrink on other fronts that include ensuring deliveries are on time and made in full. He said Dollar General is also focusing on delivering a more consistent front end staffing presence and removing high-shrink SKUs.

A focus on reducing store manager turnover is also part of Dollar General’s shrink reduction initiatives. Vasos said the company is seeing year over year reductions in turnover in all levels within its retail operations, including regional director, district manager, store managers, assistant store managers and sales associates.

Despite the shrink-related concerns, Dollar General’s Q1 performance beat analyst expectations, driven by better than expected sales, traffic and upside to the operating margin, analysts with Telsey Advisory Group led by Joe Feldman said. The consumables comp was positively offset by negative comps in home, seasonal and apparel, Feldman said.

Vasos also said during an earnings call that softness in discretionary categories reflects the continued spending pressure consumers are currently experiencing. Consumers “continue to be very value oriented in their shopping behavior, which we see manifested in accelerated share growth in private brands sales as well as increased engagement with items at or below the $1 price point,” Vasos said. “Importantly, we continue to do well with our core customers while growing with middle and higher income trading customers from adjacent cohorts.”

Dollar General’s first quarter beat is “evidence that more defensively positioned consumable heavy models are positioned to navigate a softer, low-income backdrop,” Wells Fargo analysts led by Edward Kelly said in a note.  Wells Fargo’s analysts said Dollar General’s “challenged performance” last year offers room for improvement. The retailer’s Q1 performance “suggests the company is on track for some improvement.” 

However, “while we are disappointed to hear management admit in the release to experiencing shrink and mix headwinds greater than initially expected coming into the year, the margin didn’t miss,” Wells Fargo said.

Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData, echoed that sentiment, describing 2023 as a “torrid” year for the retailer that saw Dollar General stumble across several areas as comparable sales slipped into negative territory. But the first quarter appears to be starting on a more positive note.

“Dollar General remains a nicely profitable company and is generating a reasonable return,” Saunders said. “However, we believe profit growth will remain subdued for the balance of this year as investments continue. In our view, Dollar General has made the right determination that sales and customer share must be protected in the short term, even if that comes at the expense of some margin.”

For Q2, the company’s outlook is for same-store sales growth in the low 2% range. Dollar General reiterated its full-year guidance with net sales growth ranging from 6% to 6.7% and same-store sales growth ranging from 2% to 2.7%.

India completed its seven-phase election process for the Lower House (Lok Sabha) of parliament on June 1, with results likely to be officially announced on June 4, but it appears likely is that India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is likely to win a third consecutive term in office, exit polls suggest.

Analysts warn the polls, released by various news agencies, have often been wrong in the past and are not impartial. However, they have placed Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as the frontrunner in the general election.

The BJP, the main opposition Congress party and regional rivals battled it out in a fierce campaign over seven phases of polling.

A party or coalition needs 272 seats in parliament to form a government. The BJP led-coalition, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), will cross this target – according to exit polls, which forecast it being close to taking about two-thirds of the seats.

In his first comments after voting ended, Modi claimed victory without referring to the exit polls.

“I can say with confidence that the people of India have voted in record numbers to re-elect the NDA government,” he wrote on X, without providing evidence of his claim.

Exit polls results started coming in since the evening of June 1, and suggest the following trends according to Goldman Sachs:

• All exit polls (available at the time of writing) show the incumbent BJP-led NDA alliance to be in a comfortable lead, with the average number of seats projected around 360+ within a range of 281 – 415. This is above the 272 seats (out of a total of 543) required for a majority, to form the government at the centre (Exhibit 1).
• The average number of seats for the Indian National Congress-led I.N.D.I.A. alliance is projected to be around 150 within a range of 107-201.
• The NDA alliance is leading in most of the largest states by vote share

Implications for government policies

According to Goldman, most clients the bank met with in recent months appeared to infer that political continuity would contribute to a stable macro-economic environment and continuing reforms. Regardless of which party or alliance takes office, the bank focuses on potential major policy changes that could be a priority for the new government.

From an earlier analysis on potential growth in India conducted by Goldman (available to pro subscribers here), one important conclusion was that the growth upside from higher labor force participation, and productivity or TFP growth, outweighs the upside from only increasing investment rates. Hence, along with creating physical infrastructure (through higher investments) India needs to remain steadfast on structural reforms like land and labor market reforms while creating a conducive environment for millions of workers to be gainfully employed, to realize its true growth potential. The window for this is likely going to be largest in the next several years as companies globally re-align their supply chains.

In terms of policies from the new government, Goldman expects focus on the following:

• a) Reforms: Progress on structural reforms like land and labor market reforms to create an enabling regulatory environment for manufacturing growth.
• b) Infrastructure: Continued focus on infrastructure creation, through more rail network, along with enhancing road network.
• c) Manufacturing: Continued focus on manufacturing, with some emphasis on labor-intensive manufacturing through fiscal incentives.
• d) Services exports: Focus on high value-add sectors for services exports – where India has already made progress – by establishing more Global Capability Centres (GCCs), Global Technology Centres (GTCs) and Global Engineering Centres (GECs).
• e) Agriculture sector: Focus on farm sector policies for better productivity in the sector, and higher income of farmers.

Macro and market views

Goldman’s analysts concludes that a narrow current account deficit, and adequate FX reserves means that the Rupee offers resilient carry in a ‘stronger for longer’ Dollar world, among most EMs. Additionally, inflation back within the RBI’s target range, and a consolidating fiscal deficit (from high levels) means that IGBs, that are soon to be included in the JPM EM bond index, remain an attractive source of low-vol yield for fixed income investors. The bank continues to recommend long 2-year IGBs and short EUR/INR, and the equity strategists continue to see further upside in equities.

More in the full Goldman notes available to pro subs (here and here).

Authored by Darren Taylor via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

“South Africa’s a new country today, but I’m really afraid of that. We don’t know what that looks like,” Pieter Fourie, a middle-aged, middle-class man walking his shaggy Alsatian through autumn leaves on a street in Melville, Johannesburg, said.

His younger companion, Sally Kruger, sighed.

“For many years we prayed to get rid of the ANC [African National Congress]. We watched as it destroyed our beautiful country,” she said, gesturing toward a gaping pothole filled with muddy water.

“But now that the ANC’s fallen so badly, so fast, in such a shocking way, I’m finding it hard to find a reason to celebrate.”

Ms. Kruger’s voice trailed off, almost drowned out by screeches from a flock of African ibises.

“I mean, look at what’s rising to replace it!” she exclaimed. “Something even worse. We were in trouble under the ANC. Now we’re in even bigger trouble.”

The couple’s insightful musings reflect the concerns of many citizens in Africa’s largest economy, and its most developed democracy, as the implications of the May 29 election filter through the suburbs, townships, and villages of this “Rainbow Nation” of 62 million.

The ANC, in power since Nelson Mandela led it to a sweeping victory in South Africa’s first multiracial, multiparty poll in 1994 to end white minority apartheid rule, has captured less than 40 percent of the vote, with almost all ballots counted.

The stunning result is reverberating around the world and was predicted by only one survey in the runup to the election.

Most polls had support for the ANC at about 45 to 48 percent.

That outcome would’ve still pushed it into a coalition government, but one that would’ve enabled it to continue exerting dominance in terms of policy direction with support from a few small parties over which it could wield its authority.

Now, if it’s to hold on to a semblance of power, the ANC will have to form a coalition with a larger opposition party, or parties, which it won’t be able to push around.

By law, the new government must be announced within 14 days, so it doesn’t have much time to negotiate its way back into the Union Buildings.

The ANC’s potential partners could not be more different.

On the one side is the centrist Democratic Alliance (DA), which has won 22 percent of the vote and up until now has been the official opposition.

The DA is led by a middle-aged white man, John Steenhuisen, who’s often accused by the ANC of wanting to preserve “white privilege.”

The DA is pro-business and pro-West, and wants to end affirmative action and replace it with “merit-based” employment, privatize state-owned companies, and weaken the “untrammeled” power of ANC-affiliated labor unions.

These policies are “poisonous,” to the ANC, the party’s secretary-general, Fikile Mbalula, said in an interview with The Epoch Times shortly before the election.

On the other side of the chasm are two radical leftist parties led by charismatic, allegedly corrupt black men who once vowed to “die for the ANC”: Umkhonto we Sizwe (MKP), whose figurehead is former President Jacob Zuma, 82, and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), whose “commander-in-chief” is Julius Malema, 43.

Together, the MKP, with 15 percent, and the EFF, with a little less than 10 percent, have won almost a quarter of votes cast.

If they form a coalition, they could replace the DA as the official opposition.

The MKP and EFF are “natural bedfellows,” according to professor Dirk Kotze, governance expert at the University of South Africa in Pretoria.

Both are “proudly Marxist” and, like the ANC, are fervent supporters of regimes in China, Russia, Iran, and Zimbabwe.

Both accuse the ANC of “selling out” to white capitalists.

Both advocate seizing white-owned land, including farms, and “nationalizing” mines and banks.

MKP and EFF say all forms of private wealth must be “equally redistributed” among South Africa’s estimated 27 million poor people, mostly black.

Both want to cut trade ties with Western countries in favor of closer cooperation with a “Multipolar World Order” led by Beijing.

Both have made statements vilifying white citizens; Mr. Malema has twice been found guilty of racist hate speech against white people.

Should the ANC choose to partner with one, or both, of these extremist parties to form a coalition government, financial experts say it’ll trigger taxpayer and investor flight and herald the collapse of South Africa’s economy, which is built on gold, platinum, an advanced banking system, and agriculture.

“There’s a faction inside the ANC that remains pro-Zuma and actually admires Malema and agrees with EFF and MKP policies,” Melanie Verwoerd, an independent political analyst and former ANC member of parliament, said.

“Then there’s a more moderate part of the ANC, under [current President] Cyril Ramaphosa, that realize the terrible implications of signing up with either MKP or EFF,” she told The Epoch Times. “This part will prefer to go into coalition with the DA, but they probably don’t have the upper hand at the moment because the ANC under Ramaphosa has performed so poorly in the election.”

Mr. Steenhuisen told The Epoch Times the DA “remains willing to listen to the reasonable people still left” in the ANC.

“We’ll do what’s best for all South Africans,” he said. “We must keep the country out of the hands of the extremists. We must believe them when they tell us exactly what they’ll do with power. They’ll sow racial hatred. They’ll steal private property. They’ll launch a pogrom against white people and legal and illegal African migrants. They’ll sell the country to the Chinese and Russians. They’ll sink more millions into poverty by antagonizing Western investors and trade partners. They’ll make the ANC’s corruption look like small change.”

ANC’s implosion

Mr. Kotze told The Epoch Times the ANC has been a “victim of its own folly and blindness.”

“It’s still a political force in South Africa, but no longer a force to be reckoned with,” he said. “This election has obliterated it.”

Mr. Kotze added that voters had “lambasted” the ANC for 20 years of “consistent failures” on almost all fronts, including governance, the economy, and law enforcement.

“Things started well under Mandela, and things were quite good for a while under [President Thabo] Mbeki,“ he said. ”But when Mbeki started losing control of the ANC around the mid-2000s, to people who just wanted to steal and had no idea how to govern, that’s when South Africa’s downward trajectory began.”

In the months leading up to the May 29 vote, political think-tanks, analysts, and experts branded it the most significant in 30 years.

The ANC was badly wounded, they said, broken by a criminal class within its ranks that had stolen billions of rands, its corruption and mismanagement bankrupting state-owned enterprises to such a degree that ports and railways no longer work, electricity outages plunging South Africa into darkness and economic paralysis on a daily basis.

“Entire towns have been wiped off the face of the earth by the maladministration of ANC municipalities,” Prince Mashele, of South Africa’s Centre for Politics and Research, said.

Failure to curb violent crime, including a murder rate that now stands at 84 per day, also dealt it a “death blow,” he said.

Mr. Kotze said the ANC’s black economic empowerment and “cadre deployment” policies have made people close to the ruling party extremely rich but failed to pull millions out of extreme poverty, reflected in the world’s highest “real” unemployment rate, 41 percent.

Going into the election, though, Mr. Ramaphosa would only acknowledge that his party had made “a few mistakes,” never explaining exactly what those mistakes were, and never apologizing.

“That was a huge miscalculation on his part,” Mr. Mashele said.

As the election approached, the ANC remained confident, in public at least, that voters would elect it back into government by a “large majority,” in Mr. Ramaphosa’s words.

“South Africans know we are the only ones who can improve their lives,” the president said at a rally in Soweto.

Mr. Kotze said the ANC’s “arrogance harmed it immensely” in the election.

Even when the scale of the destruction suffered by the party became clear on May 31, senior ANC official Gwede Mantashe, one of Mr. Ramaphosa’s closest aides, told journalists: “Leave predictions and polls aside. Votes are still flowing in. I’m optimistic we’ll easily reach more than 50 percent.”

Amid the melee of the results hub of South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission near Johannesburg, analyst Wayne Sussman told The Epoch Times: “When counting began at pace on Thursday, I confidently projected the ANC would end on 45 percent. To have the ANC now at around 40 percent, with almost all results declared, tells you the tale of the damage suffered by Africa’s oldest former liberation movement. This is a party that got 70 percent of the national vote in 2004! Its implosion has been amazing. A historic new era of coalition governance has begun, and it’s probably going to be extremely volatile and chaotic.”

That volatility and chaos has already begun: News that the ANC will have to form a coalition government, and the uncertainty this will bring, has caused prices of shares in major South African companies and the value of the rand to plummet.

A week ago, the rand was trading at 18 to the United States dollar; now it’s at almost 19.

Authored by Megan Redshaw, J.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Young girls are starting their first periods earlier than they have in previous decades—a shift associated with adverse health outcomes later in life.

A new study published on May 29 in JAMA Network Open revealed that the median age at menarche has remained relatively stable at around 12 years, and the proportion of girls starting menstruation before age 11 has significantly increased over time.

Menarche, or the first menstrual period, marks the beginning of the monthly hormonal cycle and reproductive lifespan. Additionally, it signifies the end of female puberty.

Researchers with the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health’s Apple Women’s Health Study examined data from more than 71,000 U.S. women born between 1950 and 2005, encompassing various ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds. They aimed to determine the age at which these women experienced their first menstrual cycle and how long it took for their cycle to become regular.

The study found that nearly 16 percent of women born between 2000 and 2005 started their menstrual cycles between ages 9 and 11, compared to almost 9 percent of those born between 1950 and 1969. Additionally, researchers observed an increase in the number of women experiencing irregular menstrual cycles for three years or more after menarche.

When stratifying trends by race and ethnicity, participants who were Asian, Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, or of other or multiple races or ethnicities were consistently more likely to experience early menarche than non-Hispanic white participants.

An exploratory analysis of a subset of 9,865 participants estimated that 46 percent of the trend could be attributed to body mass index—a measure of a person’s body fat based on height and weight. The authors noted that obesity is a risk factor for early-onset puberty and that childhood obesity is on the rise in the United States, which could explain the trend toward earlier menarche. However, it’s unknown to what extent changes in early BMI affect the trend. The underlying cause of the remaining 54 percent experiencing early menarche remains unclear.

Menstrual Cycle Considered Vital Sign of Health

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) considers the menstrual cycle to be a vital sign of overall health, and irregularities can indicate underlying health issues, such as hormonal imbalances, thyroid disorders, or other medical conditions. The menstrual cycle also involves the immune system as uterine immune cells undergo substantial changes and facilitate the thickening and thinning of the uterine lining.

According to ACOG, girls typically have their first period between 12 and 13 years of age, but it takes a few years for menstrual cycles to become regular. Until then, adolescents may experience irregular periods as their bodies adjust to new hormonal patterns.

Early Periods May Cause Health Problems

A growing body of evidence, including the current study, links early menarche and a longer time to regularity with an increased risk of health conditions, such as cardiovascular diseases, cancers, diabetes, asthma, multiple sclerosis, metabolic conditions, and all-cause mortality.

A 2021 study published in the Annals of Epidemiology found that earlier menarche in girls and a longer time to reach menstrual regularity were associated with an increased risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Girls who started their first period at age 11 or younger were at an increased risk of death from diabetes, breast cancer, and other cancers compared to those who had their first period at 13 years.

A 2021 study in Cancer Research found that early exposure to sex hormones associated with early-onset menstruation is associated with an increased risk of seven cancers in middle-aged women.

A 2020 systematic review and meta-analysis of 28 studies in PLOS Medicine found that girls who experience earlier menarche have an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance in adulthood.

In a meta-analysis of eight prospective studies involving 4,553 subjects with endometrial cancer, researchers found that an earlier age of menarche is associated with an increased risk of endometrial cancer. Likewise, a previous study by the same authors found a “statistically significant inverse association” between ovarian cancer and later menarcheal age.

Evidence also suggests early menarche may enhance multiple sclerosis disease activity in children. In a Canadian prospective study, researchers found a 36 percent decrease in the probability of having a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis for each year menarche was delayed, although a delayed-onset menstrual cycle accompanies its adverse health problems.

The US Secret Service on Friday said that Donald Trump’s conviction in his ‘hush money’ trial will have “no bearing” on whether the agency will protect him.

According to the agency, “today’s outcome has no bearing on the manner in which the United States Secret Service carries out its protective mission,” adding that “our security measures will proceed unchanged,” the Epoch Times‘ Jack Phillips reports.

Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts for falsifying business records in connection with a 2016 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels. He will face sentencing on July 11, during which Judge Juan Merchan could toss the former president in jail. Prosecutors have not indicated whether they will push for this, while Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg (who downgraded 60% of felonies in his district to misdemeanors, while elevating a an obscure, rarely prosecuted crime to a felony in Trump’s case).

As the Epoch Times notes, several weeks ago, the Secret Service issued a similar statement to The Epoch Times regarding how it would handle the former president’s security if he were jailed, coming after Judge Merchan warned him that he would be prepared to send him to jail over comments that he said violated his earlier gag order.

On May 8, the agency responded to questions about how the Secret Service would respond if President Trump were jailed, saying that “under federal law, the United States Secret Service must provide protection for current government leaders, former Presidents and First Ladies, visiting heads of state and other individuals designated by the President of the United States.”

That comment also didn’t go into specifics about how it would handle security. At the time, the spokesperson did not respond to a question about whether a Secret Service agent could be stationed in a cell with the former president.

“For all settings around the world, we study locations and develop comprehensive and layered protective models that incorporate state-of-the-art technology, protective intelligence, and advanced security tactics to safeguard our protectees,” the spokesperson said. “Beyond that, we do not comment on specific protective operations.”

The lead attorney for President Trump, Todd Blanche, told CNN that he thinks the former president should not face prison time, in part due to his age. President Trump, 77, also has no prior convictions, he noted.

“There’s a system in place where you rely on precedent, and somebody like President Trump should never, never face a jail sentence based on this conduct,” Mr. Blanche said.

“And it would just kind of confirm what we’ve been saying all along,” he continued. “And a lot of people say that we’re wrong and that we’re missing key pieces. But if other 77-year-old, first-time offenders would never be sent to prison for this conduct.”

The charge he was convicted of, falsifying business records, carries a maximum sentence of four years in prison. Others convicted of that crime often receive shorter sentences, fines, or probation, but the judge in the case said during jury selection that President Trump faces a potential jail sentence.

After the conviction was handed down on Thursday evening, Judge Merchan set the sentencing date for July 11, or four days before the start of the Republican National Convention. President Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee for president.

Incarceration would not prevent President Trump from campaigning or taking office if he were to win during the November election. He also will not be jailed ahead of his sentencing.

After two days of deliberation, a jury of New Yorkers found President Trump guilty of all 34 criminal counts he faced for falsifying documents to cover up payments to Stormy Daniels in the final days of his successful 2016 campaign. The former president pleaded not guilty, denied allegations from Ms. Daniels about an affair, and said the payments were standard legal expenses.

Falsifying business documents is normally a misdemeanor in New York, but prosecutors in District Attorney Bragg’s office elevated the case to a felony on the grounds that President Trump was concealing an illegal campaign contribution.

He still faces three other criminal prosecutions, but the New York verdict could be the only one handed down before Americans vote, as the other cases have been tied up in legal wrangling. President Trump has pleaded not guilty in all four cases, which he says are politically motivated.

“If this can happen to me, it can happen to anyone,” he posted on social media, describing the New York trial as “rigged.”

National opinion polls show President Trump locked in a tight race with President Joe Biden, and one in four Republican respondents in an April Reuters-Ipsos poll said they would not vote for him if he were convicted of a felony by a jury.

Allen Zhong and Reuters contributed to this report.

By John Liu and Zheng Wu, Bloomberg Markets Live reporters and strategists

Three things we learned last week:

1. China’s central bank gave its strongest warning yet against overheating in the government bond market. A paper backed by the People’s Bank of China said the monetary authority is ready to sell bonds if needed and suggested a reasonable range for the 10-year yield should be 2.5% to 3%.

PBOC’s repeated warnings against what it deems as excessively low yields have largely been shrugged off by investors. Unconvinced by China’s economic recovery and housing rescue plans, bond bulls have been betting the central bank will have to do more, such as lowering interest rates and even turning to the controversial step of quantitative easing.

Investors may have to take it more seriously this time. The PBOC has every reason to be concerned over falling interest rates. While cheaper borrowing costs have benefits, a yawning yield gap with the US is adding pressure on the yuan and fueling bearish sentiment toward Chinese assets — raising the risk of capital outflows.

The central bank may want to root out expectations of aggressive monetary easing. Such speculations have led to an influx of money into the bond market, draining bank deposits and funds available for the real economy. It may perhaps be sending a subtle message to the Ministry of Finance that the the heavy-lifting of growth should come from the fiscal side.

2. China’s factory activity unexpectedly contracted with the official manufacturing purchasing manager index falling to 49.5. While more focus was given to the sudden weakness, the non-manufacturing gauge also flashed a warning with a slower-than-expected expansion. Together, they put in doubt the ability of China to reach the growth target of around 5% this year.

China’s recovery this year has largely been driven by export-oriented firms as domestic consumption is weighed down by the real estate slump. That pillar of strength is at risk of losing its mojo as trade tensions rise along with more protectionist measures against Chinese products. Persistent demand weakness may also be starting to erode production strength, according to Citi analysts.

While stock market reaction was muted right after the PMI data release, key equity gauges ended Friday in the red while the yuan also slipped against the dollar. The weakness in eco data tends to draw mixed reaction among investors, with some seeing it as a positive signal for more policy support while others regard it as just another reason to sell Chinese assets.

3. Last week started with renewed excitement over property support as top-tier cities joined the easing bandwagon, but the upbeat mood didn’t last long. A Bloomberg Intelligence index tracking China’s developer stocks slid around 6% in the five days through Friday, taking its loss since a May 17 high to roughly 19%.

Shanghai, Shenzhen and Guangzhou lowered requirements for home downpayments and cut the minimum rates charged for mortgages, following through on the central government’s aid for the embattled property sector. The fact that property shares fell despite the easing measures from China’s biggest cities shows the bar to satisfy frustrated investors is getting higher and higher.

The mood is more cautious among fixed-income managers, who pay closer attention to the developers’ credit risks. They say the sector is not out of the woods yet, with their refinancing options limited ahead of near-term maturity walls. As the chorus grows for even more policy support, it’s unclear how and when the property crisis can be solved. The country has the equivalent of 60 million unsold apartments, which will take more than four years to sell without government aid, according to Bloomberg Economics.

Via SchiffGold.com,

Central bank monetary tactics have proven to be a toxic remedy, amplifying rather than curing economic ailments. Like a surgeon whose operation only worsens the patient’s condition, central banks administer policies that do more harm than good. Here are five ways central banks leave a legacy of financial turmoil.

The following article was originally published by the Mises Institute. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of Peter Schiff or SchiffGold.

Central banks’ monetary policies are the most perverse government intervention. Their consequences are dire, last for a very long time, and people don’t perceive them as problems or don’t comprehend the damage they are doing. Monetary policy (monetary expansion and artificially low interest rates) has five main consequences that harm overall living standards.

1. Price Inflation

This is the most obvious consequence, and yet, it is very misunderstood by voters. If the money that is effectively circulating in the economy (i.e., M1 and M2, or for a better perspective, the true money supply) increases, price inflation tends to increase. The expansion of the money supply destroys consumer purchasing power and makes people poorer over time.

2. Bigger Government

Government spending and indebtedness are intensified due to expansionary monetary policies (since central banks buy government bonds). More resources are allocated to pay for politicians’ and bureaucrats’ luxurious lives and for government programs that, at their best, are more expensive compared to a free market solution. Governments don’t have an incentive to allocate the resources efficiently (since they can just raise taxes, go deeper into debt, or print money), so anything that it does ends up being more expensive than it would have been without monetary intervention.

3. Financial Assets Become Overpriced

Monetary policy is behind the major financial crisis and its precedent asset bubbles.

The stock market is overpriced because artificially low interest rates raise the present value of corporations’ future earnings, making their stocks go higher without having sound fundamental indicators. Artificially low rates also incentivize people to go into debt to buy stocks, which raises their prices. Plus, some central banks (like the Bank of Japan and the Swiss National Bank) have stocks on their balance sheets, which also appreciates their prices due to the artificial demand.

Real estate prices are inflated as well. Houses and buildings are what Rothbard would call “higher order” goods due to their very long capital structure. He notes,

The supply of funds for investment apparently increases, and the interest rate is lowered. Businessmen, in short, are misled by the bank inflation into believing that the supply of saved funds is greater than it really is. Now, when saved funds increase, businessmen invest in “longer processes of production,” i.e., the capital structure is lengthened, especially in the “higher orders” most remote from the consumer.

Overpriced real estate assets also turn houses, apartments, and commercial properties into an asset class (something to invest in and, in theory, protect oneself from the very inflation that caused the real estate prices to go up in the first place) rather than what they would be if it wasn’t for the government’s meddling: houses and apartments for living, and commercial properties for economic activities, either by renting or buying.

4. Economic Inequality

This one is linked to our previous argument. Thanks to loose monetary policy, financial assets appreciate without being backed by proper fundamentals. Richer people (the ones who have the most financial assets) get even richer not because their investments are improving companies’ productivity (providing more or better goods and services), but because their assets are being inflated by monetary policy.

The financial market turns out to be less accessible for the average Jane and Joe due to the following:

• Stocks are more expensive and risky and therefore less attractive for one who can’t afford to lose a lot of money.

• The bond market is also less attractive since their prices go higher due to the artificial demand from the new money supply; hence, its rates go lower. This makes the bonds attractive for people who want to buy them as a speculation on their price (if rates go even lower, their prices go up and the investor makes a profit). Alas, since bonds are expensive, average people can’t afford the risk.

• Financial markets become more complex since there are a lot more tricky instruments (like derivatives) to deal with market volatility (which would be lower if not for government poking) or to increase returns (not without higher risks). And the use of such instruments by asset managers makes their expenses and fees go higher, which also increases their required minimal investments (excluding the less-fortunate people from the game). Side note: government regulations for financial markets, like the ones of agencies like the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (yes, this is a private corporation, but it is a monopoly imposed by the government) and the Securities and Exchange Commission, also increase required minimal investments.

So, the average Jane and Joe have fewer tools to get richer. And this keeps getting worse as long as central banks keep up with their dovish monetary policy.

Housing also becomes less affordable, and average people must sacrifice a lot more (and for a much longer time) to save for buying a home. What would be a simple task turns into a long and tiresome effort. This diminished the number of first-time homebuyers, and young people had to delay it. But now, even people in their thirties are living with their parents or other relatives. And homelessness is increasing in major cities like Los Angeles and Lisbon (both foreigners and Portuguese people).

5. Higher Time Preference Equals Less Economic Growth and More Indebtedness

Artificially low interest rates destroy the incentive for savings. In many cases, even if price inflation is low, the return on savings does not compensate for the time that people didn’t use the money. The overall time preference gets higher. People are not willing to wait to spend their money. If there is no return, they might as well party right away.

Indebtedness also increases for consumption instead of being used for investments that would increase productivity and economic growth. This also makes prices go higher than they would be because higher productivity tends to lower prices, and this process is, best-case scenario, delayed by lower savings. In other words, governments don’t let deflation (which would make prices go lower over time) happen.

Price inflation itself also creates an incentive to spend right away (since the purchasing power gets lower every year), and artificially low interest rates make the money market (which would be an easy tool people could resort to for parking their savings) not attractive. And, since overall time preference is higher, most people don’t settle for just preserving their purchasing power (which sometimes can be achieved with gold). They want a fast and high return, a dangerous combination. So, they go to the stock market, which is overpriced thanks to a loose monetary policy, which was covered earlier.

Conclusion

Government interventions through central banks are the most destructive and yet the least understood by most people. It is a bad enough problem to deal with on its own, and even harder to do so when people fail to perceive its damage. Central banks are the source of most evils in the economy.

At the 2024 Taipei International Information Technology Show, better known as Computex, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang highlighted the endless possibilities surrounding artificial intelligence. He unveiled plans for new AI accelerator chips, signaling the company’s shift from graphics cards to AI chips. 

In March, Nvidia unveiled the $70,000 Blackwell B200 GPU chip, the “world’s most powerful AI chip.” On Sunday, Huang told the audience about the Rubin AI chip slated for 2026. He said the new chip would use HBM4, the next iteration of the essential high-bandwidth memory. 

Wall Street DOES NOT understand what’s coming.$NVDA just changed everything we know about AI at COMPUTEX 2024.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you: pic.twitter.com/x4tD00ubJ4

— Alex (@TickerSymbolYOU) June 2, 2024

Huang stressed that companies that fail to embrace AI will be left behind. He said companies can only manage the “computation inflation” of ever-expanding data needs through AI chips. 

Combining two processors on a personal computer is already standard practice for increasing computational power, but try this at a data center…

“We add a GPU, a $500 GPU, to a $1,000 PC, and the performance increases tremendously,” he said, adding, “We do this in a data center. A billion-dollar data center, we add $500 million worth of GPUs, and all of a sudden, it becomes an AI factory.”

“The more you buy, the more you save. This is the CEO’s math. It is not accurate, but it is correct!” the executive told the audience. 

Huang’s new chip unveiling comes ahead of Monday’s cash session in New York. The company’s shares are inching closer to the $3 trillion valuation mark.

TechRadar’s John Loeffler had a running blog during Computex, commenting on Huang’s speech. One big takeaway from Loeffler is Nvidia’s transformation from a graphics card company to an AI chip company. 

They [Nvidia] are no longer a graphics company, as Jensen reportedly told employees several months back, and every Nvidia keynote and live stream I’ve watched in the last year and a half really just reinforces that fact.

Nvidia is absolutely, 100% going to become an AI chip company, and whatever gaming appendage sticks around for a few years will become less and less of a focus for the company.

There’s nothing particularly wrong with that, to be honest. Nvidia is printing money hand over fist selling AI hardware to OpenAI, Google, and all the rest, so from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense. It’d be the height of madness not to position yourself at the center of an industry that’s giving you 10x better returns than what you were doing before.

Its AI revenue, even if AMD and Intel eventually produce AI data center hardware that offers genuine competition to whatever Nvidia is producing down the road, is still going to dwarf whatever money its GeForce products bring in. GeForce might continue for some time, especially on mobile devices where RTX chips can be a way to interface with Nvidia’s broader AI ecosystem, but I think in the end, the consumer graphics market is going to come down the AMD and Intel. I just don’t see Nvidia’s heart being in the consumer graphics game any longer.

Loeffler continued:

If it helps Nvidia sleep better at night to call what its making now GPUs, they’re the ones with the $2 trillion valuation, they can do as they like. But there’s a part of me, the life-long PC gamer part of me, that feels like Nvidia has decided that the PC gamers that initially propelled the company to success two decades ago don’t really matter anymore.

Huang didn’t offer many specifics on the new chip that will begin shipping in 2026. However, during an earnings call earlier this year, the exec said the chip giant will design new platforms annually, down from every two years.