Sarah H. Sanders Takes No Crap From Virtue Signaling WH Press Corps

Content originally published at

During yesterday’s White House press briefing, Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was hit with a barrage of salty questions over President Trump’s early morning tweets about MSNBC hosts “Low I.Q.” Mika Brzezinski and her fiancée – “Psycho” Joe Scarborough.

Identity Politics 101

When NBC’s Hallie Jackson asked how “as a woman” she felt about the President attacking another woman on her looks, Sanders didn’t bat an eyelash – telling the outraged social justice journalist:

Everybody wants to make this “an attack on a woman.” What about the constant attacks he [Trump] receives? Or the rest of us? I’m a woman and I’ve been attacked by the shows multiple times – but I don’t cry foul because of it. I think that you want to create this false narrative – one hand it’s like “let’s treat everybody equally,” and on the other hand they attack, attack, attack – and apparently that’s wrong.”



Attempting to lure Huckabee into a logic trap – Jackson then asked what the Press Secretary would tell her children about Trump’s tweets. Sorry Hallie, God wins just about every time.

Hallie Jackson: You talk about being personally affected by all of this as well – and that nothing is wrong with the president fighting fire with fire – is the argument you’re making. On a personal level, you have sat here and talked about your family from this podium. Are you going to tell your kids this behavior is okay?

Sarah H. Sanders: Look, I’ve been asked before – when it comes to role models, as a person of faith, I think we all have one perfect role model, and when I’m asked that question I point to God, I point to my faith, and that’s where I tell my kids to look. None of us are perfect, and certainly there’s only one that is, and that’s where I would point.

How do Trump’s tweets help his agenda?

Jon Decker of FOX News Radio then asked Sanders whether or not Trump’s tweets helps his legislative agenda, which she threw right back at Decker and the MSM – listing how much time the media has spent covering various topics:

Sanders: You look at the coverage over the last month of the extended period between May and June – all of the major networks, if you look at their coverage and what they’re talking about, they spent one minute in the evening newscast talking about tax reform, three minutes on infrastructure, five minutes on the economy and jobs, 17 minutes on healthcare, and 353 minutes attacking the President and pushing a false narrative on Russia. I mean, look at that in comparison. If you guys want to talk about legislative agenda and focus on policy and priorities – you guys get to help set that table.


But, but – Trump should be better than a cable news journalist…

NBC’s Kristen Welker also threw down – asking about unity.

Kristen Welker: “Does his tweet this morning, his series of tweets help to unify the country?”


Sarah H. Sanders: “Look, again, I think that the President is pushing back against people who attack him day after day after day.  Where is the outrage on that?”


Kristen Welker: “I understand your point, but he’s the President of the United States, they are cable news anchors.  So he has to stand to a higher standard”

Sarah H. Sanders: “Again, I think I’ve been pretty clear that when the President gets hit, he’s going to hit back harder, which is what he did here today.”


At the end of the day

The MSM White House Press Corps played hardball identity politics in their attempt to lure Sarah H. Sanders into calling President Trump a sexist degenerate monster; trotting out women, Sarah Huckabee’s children, “unity,” and cable news anchors – and instead got served for being total hypocrites obsessed with Russia.

Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow § Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Consumer confidence is lowest since Brexit vote aftermath, survey finds

People’s view of their own financial situation and general economic outlook have got worse, says market research firm

Worries about the economic outlook and a squeeze on household budgets dented consumer confidence this month, according to a closely watched survey.

The monthly barometer of consumer mood from the market research firm GfK dropped to its lowest level since the aftermath of last summer’s EU referendum.

Continue reading…

Trump Security Chief Turned White House Aide Called As Witness In Russia Probe

It’s been a couple of weeks since the mainstream media has ID’d a Trump associate who’s been drawn into the ongoing investigations in the alleged collusion between the campaign and Russia. Today’s disclosure comes courtesy of ABC, which identified longtime bodyguard Keith Schiller as a possible witness. Congressional investigators allegedly want to interview Schiller, the former head of security for the Trump Organization who currently serves as the White House director of Oval Office operations.

Here’s ABC:

“Congressional investigators now want to interview Keith Schiller, President Donald Trump’s longtime bodyguard-turned-White House aide, as part of their investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, sources familiar with the investigation told ABC News.


Schiller, the former head of security for the Trump Organization who now serves as the White House director of Oval Office operations, is one of several Trump associates on the House Intelligence Committee’s witness list in its ongoing investigation into Russian election interference.

ABC claims that the committee’s decision to interview Schiller marks a “new phase” in the investigation, which is examining how Russia attempted to influence the election, the Obama administration’s response and allegations of collusion between Trump associates and Russian officials. But it's unclear exactly what the news organization means by this.

"The committee’s focus on Schiller and other Trump campaign officials and associates marks a new phase in the investigation — which is examining how Russia attempted to influence the election, the Obama administration’s response and allegations of collusion between Trump associates and Russian officials.


“It's the latest indication that the investigations are touching Trump's inner circle. In late July, longtime Trump associate Roger Stone is expected to appear before congressional investigators for a closed-door interview. The growing list of other Trump associates the committee has said they want to meet includes former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, Trump son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.”

To date, Kushner, Stone, Flynn and Manafort have all volunteered to cooperate with the ongoing investigations and have denied any wrongdoing. Notably, ABC’s report is devoid of any details about the questions Schiller might be asked, or the circumstances surrounding whatever it is he may have witnessed. But, as is becoming tradition with these anonymously sourced reports about the Russia investigation, the most telling details can be found at the bottom of the story.

“One White House official was unsurprised to learn that Schiller has been contacted. As the investigations expand, several White House aides have expressed privately to ABC News that they are expecting to hear from Congress or the special counsel.”

That’s right: Schiller is being called as a witness because it’s likely that EVERYBODY EVEN REMOTELY CLOSE to the president is being summoned to speak with investigators. As ABC noted lower down in the story, special counsel Robert Mueller has already interviewed dozens of witnesses as part of its probe. Schiller, a former NYPD officer, has been at Trump’s side for nearly 20 years, and is one of his closest advisers and aides — playing the role of a body man, confidant and gatekeeper for the businessman-turned-president.

Perhaps investigators will focus on the circumstances surrounding the firing of former FBI Director James Comey – a decision for which the Trump administration has provided multiple conflicting explanations, provoking outrage from Democrats. According to ABC, Schiller played a small role in the firing of Comey.

When Trump made the decision to fire FBI Director James Comey, it was Schiller who hand-delivered the letter of termination from the president to FBI headquarters.

Schiller typically keeps a low profile, though ABC notes that he headlines during the campaign after hitting a protester outside Trump Tower and ejecting Univision anchor Jorge Ramos from a Trump campaign press conference. Investigators appear to have a wide remit to interview Trump associates, and it’s looking increasingly likely that they won’t be satisfied until every single person in Trump’s orbit has been interviewed. Who knows? Maybe Anthony Senecal, the Mar-a-Lago butler who was the subject of his very own New York Times profile during the campaign, will be next?

“The Paint May Be Drying, But The Wall Is About To Crumble”: BofA Explains What The Market Is Missing

One of the recurring laments about the Fed’s hiking cycle, most recently from Goldman, is that despite 2 rate hikes so far this year, financial conditions remain the loosest they have been in over two years.Whether that is due to the market being so drunk on the Fed’s “punch bowl” it is unable to grasp the liquidity is being dragged away, or for some other unknown reason despite repeated warnings by FOMC members that stocks here are overvalued, markets simply refuse to concede that financial conditions should be tighter, in fact, as Goldman observed yesterday “so far, the Fed’s efforts to tighten financial conditions have achieved too little, not too much.”

That, in the view of Bank of America’s rates strategist Shyam Rajan is a big mistake because as he explains in his latest note titled “When paint dries, does the wall crumble?” despite the market’s repeated unwillingness to acknowledge what the Fed is doing, “recent market moves mark the beginning of a prolonged tightening of financial conditions.”

And, more notably, he underscore that despite the benign financial condition regime, the market is missing one key thing: in light of what the market perceives as a “benign flow effect” the risk currently is in the the Fed’s balance sheet “stock” and adds that “we think the market is complacent on the stock effect of the Fed’s balance sheet decline. Specifically, higher deposit betas, UST supply and/or real rates could all trigger significantly tighter financial conditions.”

To underscore his point, Rajan shows the following chart which shows just how vast the upcoming normalization will be, in light of the moves for both inflation expectations and real rates that took place during QE2 and QE3, and how small the unwind has been so far under the Fed’s tightening regime. As Rajan explains further (more below), “ever since the conversation for the Fed shifted from hikes to balance sheet after the March meeting, we have seen a significant increase in real rates and a decline in inflation expectations: the anti-QE trade. Recall that the primary objective of an expanded balance sheet was to push real yields lower (when the nominal funds rate was constrained at 0) and inflation expectations higher. As shown in our Chart of the day, when looked at through that lens, the reversal over the last few months is just the beginning of a long process.”

Rajan’s main point, as noted above, is that while the market has remained focused on the central bank flow which it – erroneously – assumes will not be a major risk factor, what the market should be looking at instead is the stocks. He explains:

With rate hikes in the background, market and policymakers’ attention has squarely moved to the Fed’s balance sheet. In this regard, over-communication from Fed officials to prevent a repeat of the taper tantrum has  no doubt helped. Repeated emphasis on the balance sheet being a “passive tool” and the tapering reinvestments being equivalent to “watching paint dry” seem to have convinced markets that the initial steps ($6bn UST, $4bn MBS runoffs) are unlikely to cause disruptions. Yet, while the market appears very comfortable with the flow effect, we think the longer-term stock effect is underappreciated.

Specifically, we identify three areas where the market seems most complacent going into the unwind experiment.

  1. Does the balance sheet unwind lead to an increase in deposit betas sooner than expected?
  2. Can the resulting increase in Treasury supply have a significant impact on yields?
  3. Will the increase in real yields have knock-on implications for other asset classes? All three signal a significant, albeit slow moving, tightening of financial conditions up ahead.

Going back to a point we have pounded the table on since 2011, Rajan notes that the excess reserves created by the Fed have created a liquidity illusion on bank balance sheets, in the form of excess deposits (the same excess deposits which not only are not inert as many erroneously assume, but are in fact what JPM’s London Whale used – as collateral – to corner the IG market with notable consequences).

It is these deposits that wil now contract as the Fed proceeds to normalize.  Here is Rajan:

Ultimately, as the Fed’s balance sheet shrinks, so does the banking systems’. On the asset side, banks lose cash (excess reserves) while on the liability side deposits leave (to absorb the new Treasury supply) triggering a mirror image decrease of the Fed’s sheet. However, critical to this process is the kind of deposits that leave the banking system. Although consensus remains that given the $2.1tn in excess reserves, competition for deposits will be non-existent, this assumption is heavily reliant on the less stable deposits leaving the system first (corporate, non-operational, etc.) before the more stable ones (FDIC insured retail deposits). Were the first run-offs in October to trigger the more LCR friendly retail deposit outflow, significant knock-on implications could result:

  • Deposit betas will be projected to rise faster than expected resulting in a repricing of the asset side of bank’s balance sheets (loans, mortgages etc.;
  • If deposit rates were to increase (and deposit-IOER spreads decline), demand for short-dated fixed income, especially at current levels (close to IOER) is likely to dramatically reduce.
  • Third, cash will increasingly become an attractive asset to rich valuations across asset classes. This would reduce the safe haven premium of USTs to hedge against a risk-off.

Then there is the issue of issue of Treasury supply-demand imbalance, something we first touched upon at the start of the month in “BofA: “If Bonds Are Right, Stocks Will Drop Up To 20%.” This point can be summarized simply as follows: there is $1 trillion in excess TSY supply coming down the line, and either yields will have to jump for the net issuance to be absorbed, or equities will have to plunge 30% for the incremental demand to appear. 

Rajan summarizes these concerns below:

An unwind of the Fed’s balance sheet also increases UST supply to the public. Ultimately, the Treasury needs to borrow from the public to pay back principal to the Fed resulting in an increase in marketable issuance. We estimate the Treasury’s borrowing needs increase roughly by $1tn over the next five years due to the Fed rolloffs. However, not all increases in UST supply are made equal. This will be the first time UST supply is projected to increase when EM reserve growth likely remains benign. Note both the 2003-06 and 2009-13 increase in UST supply were met with the largest increase in Chinese buying of USTs. With this unlikely to repeat, we believe price sensitive buyers need to step up. Our analysis suggests this would necessitate a significant rise in yields or a notable correction in equity markets to trigger the two largest remaining sources (pensions or mutual funds) to step up to meet the demand shortfall. Again, this is a slower moving trigger that tightens financial conditions either by necessitating higher yields or lower equities.

Readers can read the full analysis of the Treasury’s dilemma at the following link.

Treasury market dynamics aside, BofA says that the third, and perhaps most important, aspect of renormalization is that the forward path of the balance sheet decline is already having an impact on one market in the form of rising real yields:

Ever since the conversation for the Fed shifted from hikes to balance sheet after the March meeting, we have seen a significant increase in real rates and a decline in inflation expectations: the anti-QE trade (Chart 3). Recall that the primary objective of an expanded balance sheet was to push real yields lower (when the nominal funds rate was constrained at 0) and inflation expectations higher. As shown in our Chart of the day, when looked at through that lens, the reversal over the last few months is just the beginning of a long process.


The message from this combination (higher real rates, lower breakevens) is that even though there is a decline in nominal interest rates, the composition is a “bad” decline.

Besides rates, the “bad” decline shown above is negative for risk assets because ultimately “lower inflation expectations (if right) should lower forward earnings growth estimates (as earnings grow with nominal GDP) while higher real rates should raise discount rates for these earnings: an unfriendly outcome for risky assets.”

Which brings us to Ra’jan’s gloomy conclusion: “Ultimately, all three of the above – a repricing of the asset side on bank balance sheets higher, higher term premium because of UST issuance, and higher real yields – signal tighter financial conditions up ahead.”

 While slow moving, the knock-on impact on asset classes either through a shift in the underlying supply or demand dynamics is significant. We remain a structural bear on real rates to position for this scenario.

And, if right, the conclusion by the BofA strategist is precisely what Yellen, Fischer, Dudley and others have been desperate to communicate to the market over the past 5 months – unsuccessfully – when pointing out as recently as Tuesday, that “Asset valuations are somewhat rich if you use some traditional metrics like price earnings ratios, but I wouldn’t try to comment on appropriate valuations, and those ratios ought to depend on long-term interest rates.”

Judging by stocks’ reaction to the latest yield spike, the market may be finally getting it.

4 Features Your Money Management Tool Needs

If you’re like most finance techies, then you’ve tested a plethora of personal finance management tools hoping to find an all-in-one money management suite. Before jumping on the bandwagon and using an online budgeting system, consider these features which can help make your financial life easier.