Search results

Wow it gets difficult to have and intelligent respectful conversation around here. I'm no constitutional lawyer - just a jagoff trader. That's where things get gray. Beyond "high crimes and misdemeanors" it isn't clearly delineated. IMHO, it would be a level of misconduct that would not...

The fact that CL can't rally with equities tells me that $60 is incredibly likely - we're at 60-74 as I type this. And at that $60 technical support level is where the fun begins.

Well, I happen to agree with Nancy Pelosi - for impeachment to work, the irrefutable evidence of "high crimes and misdemeanors" has to reach a level where both parties in both houses supports impeachment. And that is not an impossible threshold - both parties were thoroughly disgusted by...

Good grief, after living in the Chicago area for a couple decades what the WP describes is daycare level.

If this was legitimate, verifiable collusion proving without doubt Donald Trump working directly in concert with the Russian government prior to the election with the express intent to influence the outcome of the election he would get impeached IMHO. There would be bipartisan support from both...

It would appear that you need to add "register as a legal trading exchange" to your list of key features in the thread OP. Looks like the SEC and CFTC are cracking down with a vengeance.

I was referring to Tsing Tao's post that Nancy Pelosi is in line to assume the Presidency if Trump/Pence bought the farm. So that would be the Pelosi household tax returns. Nancy's husband has a very interesting business model.

That's fair. One might also argue that former President Obama is the only real voice for the Democratic Party as well. Kind of a sad state of affairs on both sides of the aisle.

Her tax returns (on her husband's business revenues and deductions) would be almost as interesting as Trump's.

Taking over the House of Representatives - big win for the Democrats, no doubt about that at all. Absolutely. Increasing its' majority in the Senate - a surprising win for the Republicans. And a little greater margin to work with in terms of getting Federal Judges and Executive Appointments...

Better add that to the list.

80 million Democrats could have voted in their districts and it wouldn't have changed a thing in the House or the Senate. Deal with that reality. You have to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters. Moderation for both political parties would go a long way.

1. Like Volpri, I didn't get a bearish bias at all looking at the OP's first chart. 2. It's not clear to me why a "knowledge" bias is a relevant issue. 3. If you have an opinion about the future direction of the market, and the market proves you wrong, if anything that would check any...

Yep. And the new Iranian sanctions kicking in this week were supposed to tighten supplies. The North American hydrocarbons production boon has truly been a massive sea change to the world economy and to the power of OPEC.

Support at $60 might be a bit tenuous in here - $55 seems safer. This move caught more than a few longs flat-footed. $60 might present like a cheap put for big specs hunting stops and looking to collect a fast buck or two.

Repeal Article One and the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution and that would matter. Completely facile talking point - I hope it makes you feel better, though. Maybe you can convince Soros and Steyer to finance a massive migration of urbanites to less populated but equally represented...

On that I can agree. I think that the expectations for some sort of blue tsunami were a bit overblown by the political punditry. Taking back the House was a significant accomplishment.

That's a bit of a stretch. The left despises the First Amendment (for those with whom they disagree), the Second Amendment, Article One (two Senators from each State), the Twelve Amendment (the Electoral College and Congressional Apportionment)... and counting.

And yet they LOST net Senate seats to the Republicans. That wasn’t part of the blue wave narrative at all prior to the election.