AwesomeCapital

Thursday, August 21, 2025

Adams’ longtime confidant Ingrid Lewis-Martin accepted over $75K in bribes

Mayor Eric Adams’ longtime right-hand, Ingrid Lewis-Martin, allegedly accepted more than $75,000 in bribes in exchange for political favors while in her powerful role in City Hall, a bombshell set of new indictments revealed Thursday allege.

Lewis-Martin was hit with bribery and conspiracy charges in four sprawling criminal indictments detailing alleged corruption near the highest levels of Adams’ administration, from crooked migrant crisis contracts to a bizarre payoff made in $10,000 worth of seafood.

The indictments unsealed by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office come as Adams tries to salvage his re-election campaign, which has been floundering in the wake of his controversially dismissed federal corruption case.

Adams is not implicated in the new indictments against Lewis-Martin. But the charges against his longtime friend — and an incident involving another ally, Winnie Greco, bafflingly handing a reporter a potato chip bag filled with cash Wednesday — fueled the scent of scandal surrounding his administration.

“If you were willing to pay Ms. Lewis-Martin, she was open for business,” said Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Guy Tardanico during the former city official’s arraignment.

The indictments also charge Lewis-Martin’s raunchy DJ son Glen Martin II, well-heeled sibling donors Gina and Tony Argento, developers Tian Ji Li and Yechiel Landau and her close pal Jesse Hamilton – a former state senator who now serves as the city’s deputy commissioner for real estate services.

All pleaded not guilty.

One stunning indictment is focused on Lewis-Martin and others allegedly capitalizing on the migrant crisis, which saw the city shell out $7 billion to take care of asylum seekers.

Lewis-Martin, who served as Adams’ chief adviser, allegedly tapped her bestie Hamilton to take over migrant shelter contracts and steer them toward people who were paying her off, the indictment says.

She, with her son, allegedly worked to help property owners connected to Li secure lease agreements with the city for housing migrants, the indictment states.

At one point, Lewis-Martin bluntly told Hamilton to help Li, court papers allege.

“I need those done…whatever site TJ wants, I need him to get them. Because that’s our f—ing people,” Lewis-Martin said, according to the indictment.

Li received 10% of a $12 million migrant shelter contract, the indictment alleged.

He allegedly wired $50,000 of that to Lewis-Martin’s son, according to court papers.

Lewis-Martin also leaned on FDNY and Department of Buildings officials to help fast track approvals for Li’s karaoke bar V Show in Queens, the indictment contends.

“Whoever responded made an error. Please have a different set of eyes review the Plan,” Lewis-Martin allegedly texted the FDNY commissioner.

Another indictment contends a controversial revamp of McGuinness Boulevard in Brooklyn was actually Lewis-Martin doing the bidding of the Argentos, who opposed the removal of lanes of traffic.

Lewis-Martin convinced the mayor’s office to redraw their plans, over the objections of Make McGuinness Safe, an advocacy group that supported plans to add bike lanes and pedestrian spaces on the street.

“We do not care what they say,” Lewis-Martin allegedly texted Gina Argento about the group. “We are ignoring them and continuing with our plan. They can kiss my ass.”

The Argentos allegedly returned the favor by paying Lewis-Martin $2,500 — and arranging a speaking role for her on the Hulu show “Godfather of Harlem,” which filmed on their stages, an indictment states.

Prosecutors alleged Lewis-Martin used her position to make money even on small matters, such as allegedly intervening with the city Department of Buildings to help with renovation plans on an unnamed person’s private home.

The thankful homeowner paid off Lewis-Martin with $10,000 worth of free seafood for events at Gracie Mansion and City Hall, according to an indictment.

“I’m eating one of your crab cakes as I speak to you,” she allegedly told the homeowner.

The fresh set of corruption allegations comes as Adams tries to rehabilitate himself with New York City voters after a scandal-scarred first term that has tanked his approval rating, leaving him with an uphill battle at winning reelection.

Adams, who has been in a distant fourth place in recent polls, has refused to distance himself from his decades-old friend — allowing her to volunteer for his independent run for mayor.

The mayor’s campaign spokesman, Todd Shapiro, emphasized Adams has not been accused of wrongdoing.

“While Ingrid Lewis-Martin no longer works for this administration, she has been a friend and colleague of the mayor for over 40 years, and he knows her as a devoted public servant; she has declared her innocence, and his prayers are with her and her family,” Shapiro said. “Mayor Adams also recognizes that Jesse Hamilton has pleaded not guilty, and like anyone accused, he is entitled to the presumption of innocence.”

City Hall spokeswoman Kayla Mamelak said Adams remains focused on governing New York City.

“Mayor Adams was not involved in this matter and has not been accused of or implicated in any wrongdoing,” she said. “He remains focused on what has always been his priority — serving the 8.5 million New Yorkers who call this city home and making their city safer and more affordable every single day.”

Lewis-Martin was previously indicted late last year on a separate slate of bribery charges, accusing her of taking $100,000 to cover the cost of a Porsche for her son, who, along with two hoteliers, was named in that indictment.

Days prior, she resigned from her role in City Hall.

She has repeatedly maintained that she has not broken the law – and her attorney Arthur Aidala on Thursday cast the new indictments as “lawfare.”

“Her only so-called ‘offense’ was fulfilling her duty—helping fellow citizens navigate the City’s outdated and often overwhelming bureaucracy,” Aidala said. “At no point did she receive a single dollar or any personal benefit for her assistance.

“Yet, the District Attorney seeks to portray a dedicated and honest public servant as a criminal. This is not justice—it is a distortion of the truth and a troubling example of politically motivated ‘lawfare.’”

https://nypost.com/2025/08/21/us-news/mayor-adams-longtime-confidant-ingrid-lewis-martin-allegedly-accepted-over-75k-in-bribes-bombshell-indictments-reveal/

Why Powell Will Cut in September

by Sean Ring

Jerome Powell doesn’t like to surprise the markets. That much we know. The man’s a lawyer, not a cowboy. He’s not Volcker puffing cigars and shoving rates into the stratosphere. He’s not Greenspan mumbling gibberish while the markets hang on every syllable. He’s not even Bernanke, that academic deer frozen in the headlights of the 2008 crisis.

No, Powell is more like a risk-averse corporate counsel. He plays it safe. He gives the Street what it expects — and when it doesn’t expect, he finds a way to justify it later.

Well, except last September. Then, he cut rates by 50 basis points for what I could see as no reason at all… other than to goose that spluttering shit-fo-brains Kamala Harris’ polling numbers.

Thank the Good Lord he failed even to do that!

That’s why this September could be the month Powell pulls the trigger on a rate cut, even as stocks are at all-time highs, unemployment is comfortably low, and inflation — while not quite 2% — has cooled enough to lull the public back into complacency.

On the surface, it makes no sense. A rate cut is supposed to be a lifeline to a struggling economy. America doesn’t look like it’s struggling. But if you scratch just a little beneath that shiny surface, you’ll find cracks, fragility, and a political calendar that screams for Powell to take action now.

The “All Clear” Narrative

First, Powell needs a cover story. Lucky for him, he’s got one.

Inflation: It’s rolled over. CPI isn’t back to the Fed’s mythical – and ECB-suggested – 2%, but at 2.73% it’s low enough for Powell to declare victory. When you’re a central banker, “near enough” is good enough.

Jobs: Unemployment is still scraping the bottom of the barrel. Even if some cracks are appearing in the labor market, Powell can still claim the jobs picture is “resilient.” A 4.2% unemployment rate is below what’s commonly accepted as the “natural rate of unemployment” of 5.0%.

Stocks: At record highs. Nobody can accuse him of panicking into a recession call when the market ticker is glowing green.

Ironically, Powell has the perfect camouflage. He can cut without looking like he’s cutting out of fear. He can say, “We fought inflation, we won, and now we’re balancing growth.”

The Real Reason: Fragility Everywhere

The true drivers aren’t in the headlines. They’re hiding in the plumbing, like a reticulated python waiting for the right moment to pounce and then squeeze.

U.S. companies gorged on free money for more than a decade. They issued mountains of bonds at dirt-cheap yields. But those maturities are coming due. Rolling them over at 5–6% instead of 2% is a slow-motion wreck. Powell knows that one or two big bankruptcies would cascade through credit markets like wildfire.

Remember Silicon Valley Bank and the regional banking panic of 2023? That wasn’t a “one-off.” Banks are still sitting on piles of underwater U.S. Treasuries, thanks to higher-for-longer rates. Keep the screws tight for too long, and another round of failures isn’t just possible — it’s probable, and perhaps even, inevitable.

Other central banks — the ECB, BOE, and even parts of the emerging world — are leaning dovish. If Powell keeps U.S. rates significantly higher than theirs, the dollar strengthens. And a too-strong dollar crushes exports, hammers emerging markets, and makes globally issued USD-denominated debt unpayable. That’s a recipe for financial chaos — and guess who gets blamed for it?

Powell doesn’t want any of those headlines landing in October or November, weeks before America votes (even in a seemingly meaningless set of elections).

The Political Elephant in the Room

Let’s not pretend central bankers live in some monastic world above politics. Powell’s every move is judged through the lens of Washington.

Does he want to be remembered as the guy who wrecked the economy in the first year of DJT’s second administration? Hardly.

Even if Powell doesn’t like Trump, and he doesn’t, Powell doesn’t want the Fed dragged even deeper into the mud-slinging machine. A September cut lets him say:

“We did our job. Inflation’s under control. Now we’re adjusting to support growth.” (And Donald, now you can shut your pie hole.)

That’s an apolitical soundbite Powell can sell to both sides of the aisle.

But don’t be fooled — it’s as political as it gets.

The Powell Put

The Fed has trained Wall Street like Pavlov’s dog. Ring the bell, and the Street salivates for stimulus.

By cutting in September, Powell keeps the “Fed Put” alive. Stocks may be at records now, but everyone knows they won’t stay there forever. By easing policy now, Powell signals to Wall Street: “Don’t worry, we’ve got your back.”

It’s a confidence game. And Wall Street loves confidence games. Liquidity keeps flowing, IPOs keep coming, and credit spreads stay tight.

That’s what the Fed really cares about. Forget Main Street. This is about Wall Street.

Why Wouldn’t He Cut?

That’s the better question. Why wouldn’t Powell cut in September?

Is inflation too sticky? No, he can fudge the numbers enough to claim progress.
Is unemployment spiking? No, the labor market is still tight.
Is the stock market collapsing? Quite the opposite — it’s euphoric.

There’s no cost to cutting now. But there’s an enormous risk in not cutting. Something breaks — corporate debt, banks, global markets — and Powell is the man on the hook.

Cutting buys him insurance in the form of breathing room.

History’s Rhymes

Think back. Greenspan cut rates aggressively in the mid-90s, even as markets were frothy, because he feared “irrational exuberance” might flip into irrational panic. Bernanke slashed to zero after the financial crisis blew up. Yellen tried to normalize but folded at the first sign of market stress.

Powell’s no different. He hiked late, cut late, and followed the herd every step of the way. September won’t be a bold act of leadership. It’ll be yet another example of Powell bowing to pressure and finding a justification after the fact.

Wrap Up

The truth is simple: Powell is Wall Street’s errand boy.

The stock market at an all-time high isn’t a reason not to cut. It’s the perfect cover. He can say the economy is strong, inflation is tamed, and therefore the Fed has “room to adjust.”

Meanwhile, under the hood, the debt bomb ticks, the banks tremble, and the dollar looms over fragile emerging markets. Powell knows it. You know it.

And that’s why, come September, don’t be shocked when Powell delivers exactly what the market expects: a friendly cut wrapped in technocratic jargon about “balance” and “resilience.”

It’s not courage. It’s not foresight. It’s self-preservation.

The Powell Put, formerly known as the Greenspan Put, Bernanke Put, and Yellen Put, lives on.

https://dailyreckoning.com/why-powell-will-cut-in-september/

Default Warnings Start to Pile Up in the Private Credit Market

Warnings on defaults are starting to pile up in the $1.7 trillion private credit market, prompting at least some analysts to raise concern about underappreciated risks in one of Wall Street’s favorite money spinners.

For years, losses have been contained by the fact that private credit firms have more room than many other investors to be patient with borrowers when times are tough. During the pandemic direct lenders granted companies more time to pay their obligations, often by negotiating behind the scenes with private equity owners.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-21/default-warnings-start-to-pile-up-in-the-private-credit-market

Beijing's Olive Branch: Boeing In Talks On 500-Jet Mega Deal

With the tariff trade truce extended to November 10, U.S. and Chinese negotiators are working toward a trade deal ahead of a possible meeting between President Donald Trump and President Xi Jinping later this year. Key issues include the flow of critical Chinese rare earth minerals to the U.S. and Beijing's access to advanced Nvidia chips for its AI firms.

Now, a well-calculated olive branch from Beijing appears to have surfaced: a Bloomberg report indicates Boeing is in discussions to sell 500 commercial jets to Chinese airlines, signaling China's willingness to deal.

The report is based on sources familiar with the potential transaction that is still being worked out. The "mega sale", as described by Bloomberg journalists, has been "years in the making, is contingent on the two nations diffusing the trade hostilities that hark back to Trump's first term in office — and could still fall apart."

People familiar with the deal say Chinese officials have already begun talks with domestic airlines about how many Boeing jets will be needed to expand their fleets. The report did not specify which models, whether single-aisle or widebody.

This potential aircraft order appears to be part of Beijing's bargaining chips with Washington and will likely be at the center of any trade agreement.

The Biden-Harris regime made no proper attempts to ensure Boeing orders to China would ramp back to pre-2019 levels.

China is the world's second-largest aviation market, primarily relying on Airbus and Boeing jets. It is expected to double its commercial fleet to nearly 10,000 aircraft over the next two decades.

Bloomberg's news story sent Boeing shares up as much as 3.7% in premarket trading. The stock has been stuck in a 5.5-year channel following the twin 737 Max crashes, other aircraft setbacks, and investor pessimism fueled by toxic DEI initiatives on jet production lines.

The timing of this report suggests China is using aircraft orders as bargaining chips ahead of Trump-Xi talks.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/beijings-olive-branch-boeing-talks-500-jet-mega-deal

"100% By Accident": Scientists Stumble Upon Laser-Free LASIK Alternative

by George Citroner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A chemistry professor trying to heat cartilage with electricity made a mistake that could change eye surgery. Michael Hill at Occidental College accidentally used too little current in his experiment - and stumbled upon a discovery that might replace LASIK with a gentler treatment that reshapes corneas without ever cutting the eye.

The discovery may offer hope for the millions of people living with poor vision who want an alternative to glasses and contact lenses but are wary of LASIK’s risks. While laser eye surgery is generally successful, it involves cutting into the eye and can cause complications including dry eyes, vision problems, and in rare cases, severe side effects.

Happy Accident Behind the Discovery

The breakthrough happened entirely by chance when Hill and his collaborator, Dr. Brian Wong, a professor of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery at the University of California–Irvine, were frustrated with their attempts to reshape cartilage using lasers.

Hill said that they decided to try heating the material using an electric current, but accidentally used a far smaller current than they intended. They expected to see the cartilage bubbling and shaking. However, when Wong touched the cartilage, it wasn’t hot—suggesting another effect was at play.

While Wong is a medical professional, Hill is a physical chemist, and it was their partnership that allowed them to connect the dots.

Low electrical currents change the pH of cartilage, loosening molecular bonds and making tissues more malleable.

“And it’s like, this is electrochemistry,” Wong said. “That’s hydrogen and oxygen being evolved, so the discovery was entirely by accident on cartilage—100 percent by accident.”

Alternative to Carving the Eye With a Laser

Hill’s team has developed a technique called electromechanical reshaping (EMR) that uses small electric currents to make the cornea—the clear, dome-shaped front part of the eye—more malleable, then molds it into the correct shape.

The electrical current makes the cornea tissue more moldable, like clay. Once the electricity stops, the tissue locks into its new configuration.

In tests on rabbit eyes, the process took about a minute—comparable to LASIK’s speed but without incisions, expensive laser equipment, or tissue removal.

The cornea focuses light onto the retina. If it’s misshapen, vision becomes blurry. LASIK surgery corrects this by using a laser to burn a small amount of material to reshape the cornea, but it’s an invasive procedure with potential risks.

“LASIK is just a fancy way of doing traditional surgery. It’s still carving tissue—it’s just carving with a laser,” said Hill in a press statement. He will present his findings at the American Chemical Society’s fall meeting in August.

The team repeated the process on 12 rabbit eyeballs, 10 of which had simulated nearsightedness. In all cases, the treatment adjusted the eye’s focusing power, indicating potential for vision correction. The cells in the eyeballs survived because the researchers carefully controlled the tissue’s acidity levels.

They also demonstrated that the technique might reverse some corneal cloudiness caused by chemical damage, which currently requires corneal transplants.

Hill and Wong are now investigating whether the cornea can be reshaped without incisions, using EMR.

Dr. James R. Kelly, an ophthalmologist at Kelly Vision and director of Refractive Surgery Education at Northwell Health in New York, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview with The Epoch Times that EMR could “in theory” significantly reduce certain complication risks by avoiding incisions or ablation.

“There’s no flap to dislocate, no laser-induced tissue removal, and less disturbance to the corneal nerve supply,” he said. This could mean fewer dry eye symptoms after surgery. “Additionally, if EMR proves reversible, that would be a major safety advantage over current laser-based techniques,” he added.

Greater Safety and Accessibility

Hill noted that the team’s goal was to come up with a technique that was more accessible and safer than current laser-based treatments.

However, EMR temporarily alters the tissue pH, and there are “potential risks” involved—and those risks can only be sorted out through a live study, he said.

“We have data on ex vivo specimens that suggest the electrochemical technique does not cause acute changes to the underlying collagen structure of the cornea, nor does it immediately cause cellular necrosis, but these data are very, very limited,” Hill said.

Kelly said his biggest concern is whether the reshaping will hold up over time and remain uniform.

He noted that the cornea is “biologically active” and its collagen structure and hydration can change with healing, aging, or inflammation. Without long-term in-vivo data, “we don’t know if the refractive effect will regress, shift unpredictably, or affect corneal transparency.”

Kelly added that “durability, stability, and optical quality” over many years will be key tests for EMR before it can be considered a viable alternative to LASIK, and believes it could be 20 years or more before this technique becomes commercially available—if it ever does.

While funding uncertainties have temporarily halted progress, Hill remains optimistic, noting there’s a “long road” between what has been accomplished and clinical use.

“Our next steps are definitely to carry out a live-animal study.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/100-accident-scientists-stumble-upon-laser-free-lasik-alternative

DOJ Urges Fed’s Powell to Remove Cook as Probe Gets Underway

The Justice Department signaled possible plans to investigate Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, with a top official informing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell of the probe and encouraging him to remove her from the board in a letter sent Thursday.

Ed Martin, a Justice Department official who has led similar investigations into Senator Adam Schiff of California and New York Attorney General Letitia James, told Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell that Cook’s case “requires further examination” in the letter.

“At this time, I encourage you to remove Ms. Cook from your Board,” Martin wrote. “Do it today before it is too late! After all, no American thinks it is appropriate that she serve during this time with a cloud hanging over her.”

President Donald Trump has discussed firing Cook, according to a White House official familiar, but that’s not under active consideration. Trump would prefer to see Cook resign or be fired by Powell, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

Powell doesn’t have the legal authority to fire Cook, a Senate-confirmed presidential appointee. Only the president can remove a Fed governor and only for cause.

Cook on Wednesday said she intended to remain at the central bank, after Trump called for her resignation.

“I have no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet,” Cook said in an emailed statement via a Fed spokesperson. “I do intend to take any questions about my financial history seriously as a member of the Federal Reserve and so I am gathering the accurate information to answer any legitimate questions and provide the facts.”

A resignation would create another opening for Trump to fill on the Fed board as the president piles pressure on the central bank to lower rates. Trump has tarnished Fed Chair Jerome Powell as “Too Late” for not slashing rates months ago, and suggested he too should step aside. Trump has also heavily criticized Powell and the Fed over the cost of its ongoing headquarters renovation project.

Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Martin on Aug. 15 suggesting that Cook may have committed a criminal offense. The letter alleged that Cook “falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms, potentially committing mortgage fraud under the criminal statute.”

Cook became the first Black woman to serve on the Fed’s Board of Governors in Washington when she was appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022. Her term expires in 2038.

Martin didn’t immediately respond to a message left for comment. The Federal Reserve declined to comment.

“As we begin any investigation of the conduct like that by Ms. Cook in the referral, I will likely be required for confidentiality purposes to remain silent about our investigations,” Martin wrote in the letter to the Fed chair.

Her departure would give Trump an opportunity to secure a four-person majority on the seven-member board after another Biden appointee, Adriana Kugler, announced on Aug. 1 she would vacate her position early. Kugler’s term was set to expire in January. Two other governors, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, were appointed during Trump’s first term.

During her initial confirmation process, Cook faced intense scrutiny from Republican lawmakers and conservative media outlets who accused her of misrepresenting parts of her resume and tried to use that to sink her nomination. She strongly denied the allegations and was confirmed on a party-line vote in the Senate, with then-Vice President Kamala Harris stepping in to break a 50-50 tie.

As a governor, Cook has held a permanent seat on the Federal Open Market Committee, the group of 12 policymakers that votes on monetary policy decisions. The panel also includes five presidents from the Fed’s 12 regional banks.

Cook has expressed worry over inflation and tariffs this year, but also said in early August that the July jobs report was “concerning” and could indicate a potential turning point for the US economy. The central bank is expected to cut its benchmark rate when it next gathers in September.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/doj-to-investigate-fed-s-cook-urges-removal/ar-AA1KXL1c

Powell likely to play ‘Owl,’ watch data at Jackson Hole: Ed Yardeni

The payroll employment number is expected to bounce back, and as a result, I am not convinced that the Fed will actually cut rates. I know the markets think so, but I humbly and respectfully disagree," says Ed Yardeni, Yardeni Research.

Let me have your views on the upcoming Jackson Hole Symposium and what commentary Fed Chair Jerome Powell might give, especially on the key points in focus, since Donald Trump once again keeps referring to him as “Jerome Too Late Powell.”

Ed Yardeni: Well, the question will be: what sort of bird will Powell be? Will he be a dove? Will he be a hawk? Or will he be an owl? An owl just sits there and watches—and he’s going to be an owl. He’s going to say, “We are going to be watching the data.” There are two important inflation numbers still to come: the consumption deflator for July, which will be released at the end of this month, and then the August CPI in September, just before the FOMC meeting. And of course, the payroll number will also be released. The inflation numbers are likely to run on the hot side. The payroll employment number is expected to bounce back, and as a result, I am not convinced that the Fed will actually cut rates. I know the markets think so, but I humbly and respectfully disagree.

On this whole “Too Late Powell” debate—what’s your view? Is he too late or is he just on time? Because while the macro picture looks good, inflation remains sticky. For example, services inflation continues to stay above the Fed’s target. So, what do you think could happen at the September Fed meeting? Does it warrant a rate cut just yet?

Ed Yardeni: Well, I think the inflation numbers we’ve seen so far are not at 2%—they’re closer to 3%. And it’s not just tariffs. Services inflation within the CPI, and in the consumption deflator we’ll get later this month, are still relatively hot. They certainly haven’t come back to pre-pandemic levels. Meanwhile, tariffs have indeed had an impact on inflation, clearly visible in durable goods inflation. In the past, if services inflation stayed high, it was offset by deflation in durable goods, keeping overall inflation closer to 2%. This time, services inflation is around 3%, while durable goods—where prices had been falling—are now up 1.2% year-over-year due to tariffs. That doesn’t sound like much, but it’s no longer a significant offset to services inflation, which remains elevated.

What intrigues me is the posturing. For instance, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the U.S. President has put tremendous public pressure to bring the Russia-Ukraine war to a close. She mentioned sanctions on India and other actions as well. What do you make of that?

Ed Yardeni: I agree with the point about the unfairness of focusing on India’s purchases of Russian oil. But I also believe we should be squeezing Russia much harder. I’m surprised we haven’t imposed every possible sanction on Russia over the past couple of years—maybe the war would have ended faster. I also question whether Putin even wants a settlement at this point. If a negotiated settlement happens now, Russia could walk away with a “sweet deal,” which it certainly doesn’t deserve. The U.S. may still need to tighten sanctions further to get Russia’s attention.

Given the rally in U.S. markets, do you question the sustainability of the move? Because while current inflation data looks manageable, tariffs might hurt the economy going forward. Markets are anticipating a rate cut, but what’s your outlook for U.S. markets from here?

Ed Yardeni: In the short term—through the rest of August into September—we’ll probably see the market trade lower. We may already be seeing some profit-taking today, especially in the AI trade, which clearly has bubble-like aspects. Even industry insiders admit too much money is being spent on expanding capacity without guarantees of good returns. So, we could see significant profit-taking in technology stocks, particularly in AI, which might continue into September, historically a weak month for markets. By October, however, conditions could set up for a buying opportunity, leading to a strong year-end rally—a fairly typical seasonal pattern. By year-end, I see the S&P 500 finishing at 6600. But I would also like to see the market broaden out. Every now and then it teases us by suggesting it might, but then proves otherwise.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/powell-likely-to-play-owl-watch-data-at-jackson-hole-ed-yardeni/ar-AA1KQCD0

Search This Blog