Trump Gets New Review Of New York Criminal Hush Money Case

Political

Summary:

A federal appeals court on Thursday saidDonald Trumpdeserves another chance to show his New York state hush money criminal case belonged in federal court, providing a fresh opportunity for the U.S. president to try to erase his conviction.

Trump has argued that presidents are immune from prosecution over their official acts.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said a federal district judge should have more closely reviewed whether a 2024 Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity meant some evidence at Trump's criminal trial should have been excluded.

A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty in May 2024 on 34 charges of falsifying business records.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg accused Trump of trying to influence the 2016 presidential election by covering up $130,000 of hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had a sexual encounter with Trump.

Prosecutors said the payments amounted to an excessive, undisclosed contribution to Trump's campaign.

Trump denied Daniels' claim, and defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton in the election.

The judge who oversaw the trial upheld the conviction but spared Trump jail and a fine, an unusually lenient sentence he said would help ensure finality.

Trump was sentenced shortly before his January 20 inauguration for a second White House term.

TRUMP ASSERTS PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY

In seeking to move the case to federal court, Trump said the Supreme Court's finding that presidents have broad immunity from prosecution over official acts shielded him from prosecution because jurors heard evidence from his first White House term.

This included when he met with White House communications director Hope Hicks in the Oval Office in 2018, soon after news about the hush money payment became public, to discuss what he should tell the press.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan rejected Trump's bid to move the case in September 2024, saying the case belonged in state court because it addressed Trump's private behavior.

Trump's lawyer Jeffrey Wall told the 2nd Circuit in June that the criminal case fundamentally concerned federal campaign finance law, and prosecutors' emphasis on Hicks' testimony showed that Trump's official acts were central to their case.

Steven Wu, a lawyer for Bragg's office, countered that Trump's White House discussions about "unofficial behavior" did not "transform those private conversations about private behavior into evidence of official acts."

Source: TradingView

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Winkelmann

Political

Economic

Until now, the plan was to retire the venerable combat jets by the end of 2026.

The US Air Force plans to continue using its venerable F-15C/D fighter jets for several more years.

However, the service aims to transition the older combat aircraft from overseas operations to homeland defense.

"Platinum Eagles" to Fly Until 2031

The Air Force plans to extend the service of its old F-15C/D fighter jets for an additional four years. According to a report submitted to Congress in August, the service plans to completely retire its "Platinum Eagle" fleet by fiscal year 2031. Until now, the plan was to retire the venerable combat jets by the end of 2026.

According to the report, divestment of the F-15C/D is "nearly complete," and the "Platinum Eagle" fleet will be available to undertake homeland defense missions through 2030. The report clearly links the future of the F-15C/D fleet with developments on the F-15EX Eagle II, the latest version of the F-15 platform. Increasingly more Air Force and Air National Guard units are receiving the F-15EX, which was initially intended for homeland defense, thus opening the way for a potential swap in mission sets between the F-15C/D and F-15EX.

The report highlights that many aircraft, including the F-15C/D, were procured in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s and are thus operating beyond their original service lives.

"This leads to reduced availability rates, increased maintenance requirements, and higher sustainment costs," the report states.

The F-15 is one of the most successful fighter jets in recent history, with over 100 kills without any losses.

Speaking about the report, an Air Force official stated that "we expect full divestment of F-15C/Ds in FY2031 when they are replaced by the F-15EX. Until that time, we plan to maintain the 21 most viable F-15C/Ds at Fresno, home of the California Air National Guard's 144th Fighter Wing."

Titled "Long-Term Fighter Force Structure," the report outlines progress across different fighter, attack, and bomber capabilities, as well as proposes different capability requirements based on potential threat levels.

"[The Air Combat Command] is actively managing the fleet to ensure the most viable F-15C/Ds (referred to as Platinum Eagles) remain in service," the Air Force official added.

The F-35 Is Coming

The Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin designed the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter jet as the future workhorse of the US military. As an aircraft that can conduct several different mission sets, it can thus streamline procurement and production. In the future, instead of buying three different aircraft, one for air superiority, another for close air support, and one for electronic warfare, the US military will just buy more F-35s.

As the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program continues to produce more F-35 Lightning II fighter jets—the Air Force alone has ordered more than 1,700 F-35s—the service will be in a better position to replace aging aircraft like the F-15C/D. The service operates approximately 500 F-35s. However, with a global demand from over 20 countries and services, including the Navy and Marine Corps, it will be some time before the Air Force has all the F-35s it wants.

Until then, the Air Force will need to find alternative ways to project power across the world, respond to potential contingencies, and ensure the defense of the homeland.

Source: The National Interest

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Economic

For Tesla (TSLA) investors, the trillion-dollar day is here — and sparks are already flying in the hours before Thursday's annual meeting in Austin, Texas, begins.

One big spark: Norway’s $1.9 trillion sovereign wealth fund, which holds a 1.2% stake in the carmaker, will vote against CEO Elon Musk’s new compensation package, one that could net the billionaire a hefty $1 trillion.

“While we appreciate the significant value created under Mr. Musk’s visionary role, we are concerned about the total size of the award, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk," the fund said in a statement, as first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

Musk’s pay package will be the main highlight on Thursday. But investors will vote on a slew of proposals, including the status of directors and Tesla investments.

Here's a cheat sheet for the meeting, scheduled to start at 4 p.m. ET.

Trillion-dollar package

This is the big one, of course. Last month, Musk made an unusual plea at the end of the company's earnings call, urging shareholders to approve his new pay package. He claimed, among other things, that he wouldn't be comfortable without control over the company.

“My fundamental concern ... if I go ahead and build this enormous robot army, can I just be ousted at some point in the future? That's my biggest concern,” Musk said.

Musk currently holds a 13% stake in Tesla after various share sales over the past couple of years, but he hasn’t been “paid” in years, he said. His 2018 pay package is embroiled in a lawsuit in Delaware, where shareholders alleged they didn’t have enough information to properly vet the compensation awarded by the board, and a trial judge agreed. The Delaware Supreme Court is currently weighing the merits of Tesla’s appeal.

Musk’s new proposed package, which could be worth as much as $1 trillion, will most likely be approved by shareholders. The proposed package — revealed in early September — would grant Musk 12 massive tranches of stock options tied to targets the board argues are aggressive.

And approval would give Musk around 25% stock ownership of Tesla, which he claims is enough to have some “influence.”

“The stock options will vest over seven and a half years and will be granted upon Mr. Musk meeting aggressive ... milestones, which would increase shareholder value proportionality,” James Mohs, associate professor of taxation at the University of New Haven, said to Yahoo Finance. “Considering most of the compensation is incentive-based, the overall package seems fair.”

But some shareholder advocates don't buy it.

“It's not to say that if he accomplishes this extraordinary increase in the value of the company that he shouldn't be rewarded, but we're talking about a package that is just way beyond anything that resembles reasonableness in terms of compensation,” said Brian Dunn, director of the Institute for Compensation Studies Professional Programs at Cornell University.

Dunn was also a plaintiff’s expert witness during Musk’s 2018 compensation trial.

“I think a reasonable board would have tempered that along the way and say, ‘Hey, look, that's just not reasonable, right? People don't get paid that much, and this is a public company, and we're fiduciaries for the other shareholders, and we're not going to give you 12% or 15% of the company,’” Dunn added.

The pro-Musk side argues that keeping Musk at Tesla and giving him control is good for the company.

Tesla chair Robyn Denholm, a friend of Musk who has become quite rich as a member of the Tesla board, pleaded with shareholders last week to approve the unprecedented compensation package, with the threat of Musk leaving the company.

"If we fail to foster an environment that motivates Elon to achieve great things through an equitable pay-for-performance plan, we run the risk that he gives up his executive position, and Tesla may lose his time, talent and vision, which have been essential to delivering extraordinary shareholder returns," Denholm wrote in a letter last week.

But independent proxy advisers Glass Lewis and ISS argued that shareholders should not approve the latest pay package, claiming the award was excessive, dilutive to shareholders, and not issued by an impartial board.

Glass Lewis argued in particular that the proposal for Musk’s pay includes broad discretion for the board to approve dispersal of some tranches of stock, even if Musk does not hit the metrics.

The big board

In addition to voting on Musk's pay, some of the board members who came up with that package are up for reelection:

Ira Ehrenpreis, a venture capitalist who is also an investor in SpaceX (SPAX.PVT), is one of three directors on Tesla’s compensation committee and one of four on the nominating and governance committee.Longtime HR executive Kathleen Wilson-Thompson is also a member of both committees, plus the disclosure committee.Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia is on the audit committee. Interestingly, Glass Lewis advises investors to approve his election but not those of Ehrenpreis or Wilson-Thompson.

All three are expected to be elected to additional three-year terms, but not without some criticism because, like Musk, shareholders alleged they were also paid excessively.

Earlier this year, Tesla directors, including Denholm and James Murdoch, among others, had to return $919 million as part of a settlement stemming from a trial alleging the directors' compensation from 2017 to 2020 was excessive.

“Most directors fees — they get $200K-$300K a year if it's a big company — these [Tesla directors] were pulling down millions at grant value, and hundreds of millions in realized value,” Cornell's Dunn said about the board members. “I think that the directors have a legitimate interest in staying directors, because they get paid so well.”

The xAI factor

The size of Musk’s compensation package and the election of board members aren’t the only issues. There's also a question of Musk's focus.

Aside from his unpopular political escapades in Washington — like slashing federal government jobs, for instance — Musk is not only leading Tesla but also his other companies, SpaceX, The Boring Company, Neuralink (NEUR.PVT), and his AI startup, xAI (XAAI.PVT).

The xAI startup, which also includes Musk’s X.com, has raised a sizable amount of capital and is one of the more prominent AI tech companies in the valley. Musk’s own SpaceX is an investor in xAI.

Its Grok chatbot assistant is now included in newer Tesla vehicles, so it was only a matter of time before investors started asking whether the two companies could formalize a partnership that includes equity.

While Musk said a merger was not on the table, he noted that an investment might be the way to go.

"It's not up to me. If it was up to me, Tesla would have invested in xAI long ago," Musk wrote on X.com responding to a user on whether Tesla and xAI should merge. "It would be great, but subject to board and shareholder approval," Musk added.

Now, Tesla shareholders have a say in whether an investment will be made. Tesla’s board is refraining from making a recommendation on the vote.

Glass Lewis advised a vote against the proposal, not because the adviser doesn’t believe the investment is a bad idea, but because it is a decision that should not be determined by shareholders.

On the flipside, there is the perception of self-dealing where Musk is asking investors in one company to fund another venture; the same venture that Musk threatened to put his full-time efforts into, if he wasn’t given more control of Tesla.

Source: finance.yahoo

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Warren Takunda

Economic

There were reasons to be cheerful contained within the Bank of England’s latest verdict on the outlook for the UK economy, released alongside its decision to leave interest rates unchanged at 4%.

Inflation, it said, had peaked at 3.8% and was expected to fall steadily back to the Bank’s 2% target sometime in 2027. That is an improvement on its thinking in August (the last time it published forecasts), when inflation was expected to peak at 4%.

As inflation falls, economic growth picks up from 1.5% this year to 1.8% by 2028.

In the meantime, members of the central bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) signalled that rates could fall from 4% now to a possible 3% by 2028. That would still be well above the prolonged period of ultra-low rates that mortgage borrowers had become accustomed to in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, when rates fell from 5.5% at the beginning of that year to just 0.5% in March 2009.

The next cut in interest rates could come in December, providing some Christmas cheer for borrowers and coming sooner than financial markets had previously expected.

Given the expected slide in inflation and a weakening jobs market, it might be surprising that a cut was ruled out this month – and it was a close-run vote.

The Bank’s governor, Andrew Bailey, proved to have the decisive vote, making it five members in favour of holding rates at 4% and four in favour of a cut to 3.75%.

Bailey’s decision was most likely based on three factors. The first was that a rate cut today might have been seen as politically helpful for Rachel Reeves in the run-up to her budget later this month. Bank officials do not want to get mixed up in political ding-dongs, especially when Nigel Farage has questioned why the Bank of England should exist in its current form.

A budget can also change the economic arithmetic. All the signalling from the chancellor has been that in the short – term at least, the budget will include quite chunky tax rises, which will only dent consumer demand and bring down inflationary pressures. But Bailey would prefer to wait and see how the mix of budget policies, which could be many, will affect the central bank’s calculations.

And there is the reputation of the Bank of England as a bulwark against inflation – no ifs, no buts. Bailey guards this reputation closely. In the current climate, the governor might feel the Bank needs to be considered extra tough on inflation. After all, we live in a world of populist politicians at both ends of the political spectrum who demand low interest rates as an easy way to improve their popularity ratings.

The US Federal Reserve is considered in many parts of the financial services industry to have caved in to Donald Trump by signalling a more relaxed attitude to high and rising inflation. Bailey will not want to follow suit.

Of course, this is all speculation. Bailey’s official statement said he needed to be sure “that inflation is on track to return to our 2% target” before voting for another cut.

But this interpretation of Bailey’s decision this month and likely change of heart in December appears to be well founded when set against his comments in recent months.

As for Reeves, if she can navigate the budget and its aftermath, the Bank’s forecasts show that there are sunny uplands ahead.

Next year will be bumpy, with growth slowing to 1.2%, but from 2027 there is a steady expansion that should boost tax receipts and allow the chancellor to ease some of the spending cuts she has pencilled in for the second half of the parliament.

There is always the chance this benign outlook could be blown off course, but the Bank’s assessment holds out the prospect of better times ahead.

Source: Theguardian

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Cryptocurrency

The crypto market is showing tentative signs of a recovery following a bruising sell-off, leaving traders grappling with a critical question.

The upward swing saw Bitcoin bounce from Wednesday’s intraday low of $99,600 to trade around $103,400, according to CoinGecko data.

But is it the start of a sustainable rebound or a temporary respite before further declines?

“Liquidity behind Bitcoin is starting to make a recovery,” on-chain analyst Willy Woo wrote in a tweet on Wednesday, suggesting that a price confirmation could follow in two weeks.

Bitcoin has shed roughly 25% from its October peak, pushing the supply of coins held at a loss to 28.1%, CryptoQuant data shows.

Historical data show that such supply losses have often preceded price reversals. A spike in this metric to 27% in April 2025 preceded a 70% rally in Bitcoin. Back in September 2024, it kicked off a 125% surge.

Still, some analysts caution that the current bounce lacks the hallmarks of a proper recovery.

“What we are looking at right now is a technically driven rebound, being supported by spot inflows and leveraged short-covering,” Shawn Young, Chief Analyst at MEXC Research, told Decrypt. “So it’s not necessarily a resurgence of long-term conviction.”

The market needs to see consistent on-chain accumulation by long-term holders and stabilized funding rates for this bounce to become an enduring bottom, Young said.

“The recent relief bounce could come across as active dip-buying, but it is not yet eligible to be considered a full-scale recovery signal,” Young added.

For bulls, the $100,000 zone is forming as a potential accumulation range that could fuel a mid-term recovery into 2026, Jiehan Chen, Operations Onboarding Lead Analyst at Schroders, told Decrypt. The weekly candlestick close needs to hold above $103,000, he said.

For bears, the current uptick is a standard bear market bounce within a cooling cycle. If the trend persists, the dip buying zone could extend from $93,000 to $88,000, experts previously told Decrypt.

The recent drop has also caused Alex Thorn, head of research at crypto investment and infrastructure company Galaxy Digital, to lower his end-of-year target for Bitcoin from $185,000 to $120,000, signaling tempered expectations after the recent selloff.

The deciding factor or pivotal catalyst that could put this outlook on its head is the macro backdrop. Chen expects a period of choppiness ahead unless a positive catalyst, like an end to the government shutdown, changes the underlying economic outlook.

Source: decrypt

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Daniel Carter

Economic

Prime Minister Bart de Wever announced the new timeline to parliament on Thursday, following weeks of wrangling between the five-party government over how to find €10 billion ($11.5 billion) in budgetary savings.

De Wever revealed the plan after visiting Belgium's king at the Royal Palace in Brussels. The meeting had prompted speculation he could resign if a budget deal was not reached. But instead, the government parties punted the decision for another seven weeks, buying more time.

De Wever said talks should conclude within 50 days. This timeline "will not be prolonged," he told parliament. "The prosperity of tomorrow begins with courage today."

"This country needs deep, fair reforms and budgetary measures to protect our prosperity and keep our social security affordable, so that, in the medium term, our public finances comply with the European standards on expenditure," he added.

Belgium, which has long grappled with linguistic and cultural divides between the Dutch-speaking north and the French-speaking south, has struggled to get its national budget over the line.

The five-party coalition is divided over how to cut €10 billion in spending. Among the proposals on the table are raising the value-added tax and reforming long-term sickness benefits.

The budget impasse is taking place as Belgium faces pressure to increase defense spending in line with peers.

Belgium, which hosts the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's headquarters, has traditionally been a laggard in defense spending. Earlier this year it promised to increase its spending to meet the military alliance's new goal of 5% of GDP by 2035.

The European Commission says Belgium's deficit will reach 5.4% of GDP in 2025 and widen to 5.5% in 2026, making it one of seven countries the EU has called out for excessive deficits.

Rating agencies have also tracked the country's debt pile closely. S&P Global Rating kept its AA rating on Belgium in October, following a negative outlook on the country's creditworthiness in April. Moody's maintained Belgium's rating at Aa3 last month.

In a statement, Belgium's King Philippe urged the government to provide a clear budgetary path for the coming years as soon as possible, adding that it is in the interest of citizens, public finances and Belgium's "credibility on the European and international stage."

Source: Bloomberg Europe

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Economic

Is a December rate cut a “foregone conclusion?”

With the government shutdown plodding along, federal government data, like the unemployment report, have been put on hold.

That makes reliable economic reports from third-party organizations even more important. One of the most trustworthy is the ADP National Employment Report, which tracks jobs trends in the private sector.

The October ADP jobs report released on Wednesday was somewhat encouraging, as the private sector added 42,000 jobs last month, which was better than expected.

That was better than the 22,000 new jobs anticipated by economists, and a vast improvement over the 32,000 private sector jobs lost in September.

Still, 42,000 new jobs are low, down from 221,000 new private sector jobs in October 2024. Three of the previous four months – June, August, and September – have seen negative job growth, and the monthly average is around 47,000 in 2025, compared to 130,000 in 2024.

The relatively weak numbers may reinforce the Federal Reserve’s view that a December rate cut is needed, as the labor market and inflation are part of its dual mandate.

“For Fed watchers, this ADP report should make it clear that a December rate cut is now in play. We are nearing stall speed in the labor market, and that will get the Fed’s attention,” Jamie Cox, managing partner for Harris Financial Group, said.

Where the Jobs Are — and Aren’t

The latest ADP jobs report showed that there were just 9,000 new goods-producing jobs and 33,000 new service jobs in October.

Trade/transportation/utilities added 47,000 jobs, the most by far, followed by education/health services with 26,000. Financial activities added 11,000 jobs while natural resources/mining produced 7,000 and construction added 5,000.

Information and professional business services were hit the hardest, losing 17,000 and 15,000, respectively. Other services shed 13,000 jobs, while leisure/hospitality lost 6,000 and manufacturing shed 3,000 jobs.

The West added 40,000 jobs, while the Midwest produced 9,000, and the South added 6,000. The Northeast shed 12,000 jobs last month. Further, large companies added 73,000 jobs while mid0sized companies lost 21,000 and small firms shed 10,000 positions.

Pay increases remained at 4.5% for job stayers and 6.7% for job changers in October, the same as the previous month.

“Private employers added jobs in October for the first time since July, but hiring was modest relative to what we reported earlier this year,” Dr. Nela Richardson, chief economist, ADP, said. “Meanwhile, pay growth has been largely flat for more than a year, indicating that shifts in supply and demand are balanced.”

Foregone Conclusion?

The CME FedWatch survey showed that more interest rate traders viewed the job numbers as influencing the Fed not to move on rates in December.

Specifically, 64.5% said they anticipate a 25-basis-point cut in December, down from 68.6% yesterday. Still, the majority expects the Fed to lower rates.

After the October FOMC meeting, when rates were lowered to the 3.75% to 4.0% range, Fed chair through markets for a bit of a loop when he said a December rate cut was not a “foregone conclusion.”

But Bill Adams, chief economist at Comerica, expects that it is.

“The data in hand during the shutdown suggest the Fed is likely to cut its benchmark rate again in December,” Adams said. “Chair Powell said in the press conference after the decision that a December cut is “not a foregone conclusion.” Considering the latest data releases, that sounds like Walt Disney saying we’ll have to watch to the end to see if the plucky young woman saves her community on a voyage of self-discovery.”