Author

admin

Browsing

Democrats on Thursday began the process of making Vice President Harris their formal presidential nominee on a day that saw several campaign developments and highlighted one of the solemn challenges of an American president: bringing hostages home.

Democratic delegates began online voting Thursday in a process that almost certainly will result in Harris formally becoming the party’s nominee, since she is the only candidate who qualified and most of the delegates have already endorsed her. Yet her official selection will mark a significant milestone, making her the nation’s first Black woman to become a major-party presidential nominee and capping one of the most tumultuous months in recent American political history.

Parties typically nominate their ticket at their in-person convention, but Democratic leaders were concerned that early ballot deadlines in several states could make it risky for them to wait until the Democratic National Convention on Aug. 19-22. They set up a virtual nomination process that started Thursday morning and could last until Monday, though Harris could clinch the nomination sooner.

Harris is expected to name her running mate in the coming days before launching a joint nationwide campaign tour starting Tuesday across seven battleground states. The campaign has announced that Harris and her running mate will travel to Philadelphia; Eau Claire, Wis.; Detroit; the Research Triangle in North Carolina; Savannah, Ga.; Phoenix; and Las Vegas.

There was no indication of a final decision Thursday, but strategists on both sides were carefully watching the actions of the Democratic figures who have been mentioned as potential running mates.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has canceled some upcoming appearances in what could be read as a schedule-clearing move to join Harris. But a spokesman said the governor’s trip this weekend to the Hamptons on Long Island, which was planned “several weeks ago and included several fundraisers for his own campaign committee,” was canceled because “his schedule has changed.”

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) on Thursday attacked former president Donald Trump’s recent comments about Harris’s racial identity. “It’s such a desperate, desperate attempt to rebuild his campaign that’s obviously faltering,” Kelly told reporters in the U.S. Capitol. “She’s the person to bring us into the future, and Donald Trump is about divisiveness.”

At an event Wednesday hosted by the National Association of Black Journalists, Trump said he “didn’t know [Harris] was Black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn Black and now she wants to be known as Black.” He added, “Is she Indian, or is she Black?”

Kelly declined to comment on reports that he met with Harris’s vetting team in the past few days. “This isn’t about me. This is about beating Donald Trump,” he said.

Other senior Democrats who are considered close to the Harris campaign and could be potential running mates are Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

Harris on Thursday delivered a eulogy at a Houston service for the late Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.), who died last month at age 74 after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

She called her late friend “a change-maker” and a “coalition builder.” At one point, Harris misspoke and referred to herself as “president” before correcting to say “vice president” — triggering cheers from the crowd.

“It was Sheila Jackson Lee whose bill made Juneteenth a federal holiday,” she said, “which, as a United States senator, I was proud to co-sponsor. And then as president — as vice president — it was my honor with the president … [to make it into law]. It was my honor.”

On the Republican side, nominee Donald Trump’s campaign announced that the former president would participate in a rally in Bozeman, Mont., on Aug. 9. Montana is the site of a major battleground Senate race between incumbent Sen. Jon Tester (D) and Trump-endorsed Republican candidate Tim Sheehy, a former Navy SEAL.

Trump’s campaign also announced that it had raised $138.7 million during the month of July and had $327 million cash on hand. Harris’s campaign said it had raised $200 million during the first week of her candidacy. The figures cannot be confirmed until later this month, when financial disclosures are filed.

Trump did not hold any public events Thursday, but Sen. JD Vance (Ohio), the Republican vice-presidential candidate, delivered remarks at the U.S.-Mexico border in southeast Arizona.

Dressed in a flannel shirt, jeans and hiking boots, Vance greeted law enforcement authorities with handshakes and was shown a spot where the border wall — which Trump started building when he was president — was incomplete.

After 30 minutes of speaking with law enforcement officials and touring the border, Vance made comments in which he repeatedly criticized Harris and referred to her as the “border czar.” Harris and other Democrats have rejected that title, noting that Biden asked her to tackle the root causes of migration in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, not to address illegal border crossings.

Vance described several policy initiatives that he said a Trump-Vance administration would implement, including resuming border wall construction, more aggressively deporting undocumented immigrants and investigating drug crimes further.

“It’s hard to believe, until you see it with your own eyes, just how bad the policies of the Kamala Harris administration have been when it comes to the southern border,” Vance said.

Vance also said he and the former president have a “good relationship” and sought to push back on criticism that Democrats — and some Republicans — have leveled against him since he was put on the ticket. Vance, for example, has come under fire for previously calling Democrats such as Harris “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable.”

“Look, it’s the same thing they did to Dick Cheney, the same thing they did to Mike Pence,” Vance told NOTUS in an interview Wednesday, referring to past Republican vice-presidential nominees. “I think that any Republican who comes out of the gate as the new VP nominee is going to get attacked. I have no doubt that the president is confident in the way that I’ve been doing things.”

Vance said his “good relationship” with Trump “will keep on going through all the way to November — hopefully past that, too.”

The Ohio senator said he has no regrets over having been supportive of the Heritage Foundation and its Project 2025, a blueprint for an incoming conservative administration that Democrats have attacked and from which Trump has distanced himself.

“The Heritage Foundation has some good ideas, and also has some ideas that … I think are bad ideas,” Vance told NOTUS. “And regardless of whether you think they’re good ideas or bad ideas, it has nothing to do with the Trump campaign.”

Vance said he had not read the entire 900-page document. “There are some things I like about it, and some ideas in there that I strongly disagree with,” he said.

The organizers of Project 2025 recently announced that the initiative is winding down its policy operations and that its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing.

Amid the campaign activity, events unfolded Thursday showcasing the gravity of the office that Harris and Trump are seeking. Biden announced a complex release of hostages — including Evan Gershkovich and Paul Whelan, who were both held by Russia.

Biden made forceful remarks signaling that while he is no longer running for reelection, he intends to use the powers of his office to the fullest for the six months he has remaining in the office. Trump immediately questioned whether the deal was as beneficial to the U.S. side as it could have been.

Harris, who was in Houston for the memorial service, flew back to Washington to join Biden in greeting the hostages at Joint Base Andrews. She also spoke with Yulia Navalnaya, widow of Alexei Navalny, and welcomed the release of 16 individuals from Russia, including political prisoners who worked with Navalny.

“The United States stands with all of those who are fighting for freedom in Russia,” Harris said on the tarmac outside Air Force Two before flying back to Washington. “As we celebrate today’s news, we must also keep front of mind that there are other Americans that are unjustly being held in places around the world, and we will never stop fighting for their release.”

Meryl Kornfield, Mariana Alfaro, Liz Goodwin, and Amy B Wang contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

President Biden cast the release of several detained Americans in a multicountry prisoner swap as a vindication of his effort to cultivate international alliances, rebuking his predecessor’s isolationist impulses while celebrating a long-sought foreign policy achievement.

“The deal that made this possible was a feat of diplomacy — and friendship,” Biden said Thursday as he announced that three American citizens and one green-card holder had been released from Russian prisons. “For anyone who questions whether allies matter, they do. They matter. And today is a powerful example of why it’s vital to have friends in this world — friends you can trust, work with and depend upon.”

The line was a thinly veiled jab at Republican nominee Donald Trump, who has often criticized allies while pushing an “America first” agenda.

Asked directly what he would say to Trump, who has previously attacked Biden over Americans held abroad, the president responded with a question of his own.

“Why didn’t he do it when he was president?” Biden said. About an hour later, Trump blasted the deal, saying it set a “bad precedent.”

The moment reflected how an intricate, seven-country prisoner exchange — coming just 96 days before Election Day and with less than six months before Biden leaves office — was quickly thrust into the nation’s fraught political landscape.

Members of Biden’s team credited Vice President Harris for helping facilitate the deal, aiming to burnish her foreign policy credentials in her presidential campaign against Trump. Lawmakers offered praise for the diplomatic push that led to the release of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and former U.S. Marine Paul Whelan. Republicans were largely muted, though some questioned the wisdom of releasing Russian criminals for unjustly detained Americans.

Trump took to his social media site to suggest that U.S. negotiators had gotten the short end of the bargain, without expressing any gladness that the captives returned home safely.

“How many people do we get versus them? Are we also paying them cash? Are they giving us cash (Please withdraw that question, because I’m sure the answer is NO)?” Trump wrote on Truth Social about the deal with Russia. “Are we releasing murderers, killers, or thugs?”

Trump falsely claimed he freed hostages with “never any cash.” In 2017, Trump authorized a $2 million payment to North Korea to bring home American college student Otto Warmbier, two people familiar with the incident told The Post. It’s unclear whether the money was ever paid. Warmbier, a 22-year-old University of Virginia student imprisoned in North Korea after being accused of pulling down a propaganda poster, was comatose when he left the country and died shortly after arriving in the United States.

Speaking to reporters at the White House, national security adviser Jake Sullivan said that no money was exchanged in Thursday’s exchange.

He also praised the president for building the international relationships that helped facilitate the agreement, saying it “honestly could only be achieved by a leader like Joe Biden.”

For an 81-year-old president who was nudged out of his reelection bid by members of his own party concerned about his ability to carry out his duties in a second term, the swap amounted to the first major foreign policy achievement during a period in which he is aiming to bolster his legacy before leaving office.

As part of the deal, Russia agreed to release 16 prisoners: four Americans, five Germans and seven Russians, including pro-democracy dissidents. A convicted Russian assassin was released from Germany, and several Russian intelligence operatives held in the United States and Europe were also set free in the largest international prisoner exchange since the Cold War.

“It’s an important part of Biden’s legacy building phase in the lame duck period, the kind of success that has become part of the history books,” said Julian Zelizer, a presidential historian at Princeton University. “And what’s good for Biden is good for Vice President Harris.”

The release of detained Americans undercuts one of Trump’s frequent lines of attack against Biden’s handling of foreign affairs. Trump has argued that only he would be able to free U.S. citizens imprisoned abroad.

“The entire world, I tell you this: We want our hostages back, and they better be back before I assume office, or you will be paying a very big price,” Trump said in his presidential nominee acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in July.

For the first year of Gershkovich’s detention, Trump remained conspicuously silent on it, part of a long-standing pattern of avoiding criticizing Putin. As reporters increasingly asked Trump about Gershkovich, he began claiming he would secure the reporter’s release after being elected before taking office. Trump did not explain how he would accomplish that but vaguely referenced a special personal dynamic with Putin.

“Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, will do that for me, and I don’t believe he’ll do it for anyone else,” Trump said.

As for Whelan, who was first arrested in Russia during Trump’s term, Trump claimed in 2022 that he turned out down a deal as president to free the former Marine in exchange for a Russian arms dealer nicknamed “the Merchant of Death.” The United States released the arms dealer, Viktor Bout, in 2022 in exchange for basketball star Brittney Griner. Trump called that deal “crazy and bad.”

In a statement, Whelan’s family criticized the Trump administration’s early response to Paul Whelan’s imprisonment.

“Early on, we were discouraged from speaking out about Paul’s case,” they wrote. “… Those first years were hard when the Trump Administration ignored Paul’s wrongful detention, and it was media attention that helped to finally create critical mass and awareness within the U.S. government.”

The family also praised Trump’s ambassador to Russia, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, for advocating on Whelan’s behalf in 2019.

Harris plans to join Biden to welcome Whelan and the other released Americans at Joint Base Andrews on Thursday night.

Harris was in Houston to attend the funeral of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.) when the deal was announced but celebrated it on social media, writing on X that she would continue working “until every American who is wrongfully detained or held hostage is brought home.” She echoed those comments in brief remarks to reporters before returning to Washington.

Biden administration officials touted Harris’s role in the negotiations as pivotal. She helped advance the talks during a high-level meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the Munich Security Conference in February, Sullivan said.

“She was a participant in, very much a core member of, the team that helped make this happen,” he said.

Harris used the opportunity at the security conference to discuss the release of Vadim Krasikov, a Russian citizen serving a life sentence in Germany for the 2019 killing of a former Chechen rebel commander in Berlin, a senior administration official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the leaders’ private conversation.

“It became clear to us early on that to secure the release of the Americans, a critical part would be the release of Krasikov, so the vice president spoke directly to Scholz about the need to get this done,” the official said.

Harris on Thursday spoke with Yulia Navalnaya, who welcomed the release of three allies of her late husband Alexei Navalny, the political opposition leader who died suddenly in a remote Arctic prison in February.

Biden and Harris have used high-profile appearances to champion the cause of unjustly detained Americans in the past. Biden mentioned Gershkovich and Whalen during his State of the Union address in March and his speech at the White House correspondents’ dinner in April. Speaking to reporters last week, Harris mentioned the names of several Americans who were taken captive to Gaza by Hamas terrorists in October.

John Hudson contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

The Department of Homeland Security’s chief watchdog Thursday issued its long-awaited findings on the Secret Service’s handling of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, saying the protective agency had looked into the possibility of protests but “did not anticipate” the level of violence that occurred that day, according to a copy of the report sent to Congress and obtained by The Washington Post.

The report said the Secret Service did not sweep the bushes at the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters in Washington, where a pipe bomb had been placed the night before. The explosive did not detonate, but Kamala Harris, then the vice president-elect, had walked within 20 feet of the device, the report said.

The report praised agents for safeguarding top officials that day but also said it could improve communication with law enforcement and other procedures.

“Although it did not anticipate or plan for the level of violence that ultimately occurred that day, the Secret Service took actions to respond to and mitigate the threats it encountered and avoid any harm to its protectees,” the 82-page report said.

The report from the office of Inspector General Joseph Cuffari is based on interviews with more than 100 Secret Service personnel and over 183,000 emails and attachments as well as video footage from the agency.

The recommendations in the report urged the Secret Service to update its working agreement with the U.S. Capitol Police to ensure they have adequate support. The office also urged the agency to improve protocols for bomb sweepings and ordnance removal, and to ensure adequate procedures are in place for conducting internal reviews.

The report also recommended that the Secret Service develop protocols so that it could more quickly dispatch agents to support local law enforcement in case of an emergency such as Jan. 6.

Cuffari’s office sent the report to Congress but had not posted it on the agency’s website as of Thursday evening. His office did not immediately respond to questions about the report.

The Department of Homeland Security urged Cuffari’s office to make the report public.

“DHS communicated to the independent DHS Office of the Inspector General Wednesday evening and again Thursday morning our request that the IG release to the American public the same report provided to Congress,” spokeswoman Naree Ketudat said in a statement.

In a response included in the report, the Secret Service agreed with most of the OIG’s recommendations but said it could not commit to providing emergency aid to other law enforcement because that could compromise “its foremost responsibility to protect the White House and the President” as well as others in the region.

In one of her final acts as head of the agency, Director Kimberly Cheatle last month wrote Cuffari that she was pleased he acknowledged the agency’s efforts to protect the president, the vice president and other leaders, and to support the Capitol Police.

“The Secret Service is proud of the actions its dedicated personnel took on January 6, 2021, to prevent any harm to our protectees, actions that we remain committed to performing each and every day under any and all circumstances,” she wrote June 25.

She resigned July 23, days after the assassination attempt on former president Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

The report was in response to the assault on the Capitol by supporters of Trump, who were attempting to overthrow the 2020 election won by Joe Biden. The report does not highlight security failures that might have prevented the July 13 assassination attempt against Trump, the Republican nominee for president in the November election.

The Secret Service is facing multiple investigations into its security failures during the rally in Pennsylvania. The DHS watchdog is also investigating that attack. Lawmakers and others have demanded answers about why a gunman was able to climb atop a roof and fire at Trump, who was wounded. A rally attendee was killed and two others were seriously injured.

Secret Service acting director Ronald Rowe on Tuesday told a joint Senate committee that he was “ashamed” that his agency did not secure the rooftop.

The service — an elite agency charged with protecting nearly 40 U.S. leaders, their relatives and foreign dignitaries — has been praised for its agents’ selfless bravery in putting themselves in harm’s way to protect officials and safeguard democracy.

But the agency also has had embarrassing incidents, including its failure to intercept threats and a 2012 scandal in Colombia when agents arranging a presidential trip brought prostitutes to their hotel rooms. In 2014, an armed security guard with an arrest record was allowed to share an elevator with President Barack Obama during a visit to Atlanta.

In 2014, an independent panel urged major changes at the Secret Service, calling for the appointment of an outsider as director and the hiring of hundreds of new agents and officers.

In 2015, a bipartisan report by the House Oversight Committee found that the Secret Service had a staffing crisis and an insular culture that resisted change.

The report follows years of allegations that Cuffari bungled the Secret Service probe.

Cuffari did not immediately inform Congress that the Secret Service had erased its text messages from the time of the Capitol attack, costing investigators possible evidence.

The Post has reported that Cuffari’s office halted his own office’s efforts to recover the text messages. He also opened a criminal investigation and ordered the Secret Service to halt efforts to retrieve the messages.

An independent panel under the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency has been investigating multiple allegations against Cuffari since 2021, including his handling of the Secret Service probe, court records show. The panel is also investigating allegations that he led partisan investigations and retaliated against whistleblowers.

His office paid nearly $1.2 million last year to settle a wrongful termination suit from his former deputy, Jennifer Costello, who said she was fired after denouncing Cuffari for delaying a report on the Trump administration’s widely condemned migrant family separation policy on the southern border, according to the Project on Government Oversight. The nonprofit has called for Cuffari to resign or for Biden to fire him.

A pair of Democratic lawmakers also urged Cuffari to resign last year after he admitted he had failed to secure text messages from his iPhone, a possible violation of federal law, for delaying or censoring reports on domestic violence and sexual misconduct at DHS, and for not notifying Congress about the Secret Service’s deleted texts, which they said is also required by law.

Trump picked Cuffari to run the office in charge of rooting out corruption and misconduct inside the Department of Homeland Security, and he was confirmed by the Senate in 2019.

Cuffari had worked for years as a supervisor in the Justice Department Inspector General’s Tucson outpost. He retired in 2013 after an internal investigation concluded that he had misled investigators about his testimony in an inmate’s lawsuit against the government.

Carol D. Leonnig, Lisa Rein and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

A federal appeals court on Thursday made it harder for Black and Hispanic voters to form coalitions to elect the candidates they prefer in three southern states, overruling long-standing precedents.

For decades, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit held that the Voting Rights Act allows voting districts that give Black and Hispanic voters the ability to elect candidates of their choice when they have common interests and can form coalitions. Voting rights advocates have praised such rulings because they allow Black and Hispanic voters to get their voices heard even when each group does not constitute a majority on its own.

After the 2020 Census, commissioners in Texas’s Galveston County drew new lines that dissolved the only coalition district in the county. The Justice Department and voters sued, and a district court judge ruled in their favor, citing the appeals court’s precedents. A panel of three appeals court judges upheld that ruling — but also called for the full appeals court to take up the issue to reverse its prior rulings.

On Thursday, the full appeals court did just that. In a 12-6 decision, it ruled the language in Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and decisions from the Supreme Court do not require coalition districts.

“Nowhere does Section 2 indicate that two minority groups may combine forces to pursue a vote dilution claim,” the court wrote in the majority opinion.

The dissenters issued two opinions, including one that called the majority decision “atextual and ahistorical.”

“Today, the majority finally dismantled the effectiveness of the Voting Rights Act in this circuit, leaving four decades of en banc precedent flattened in its wake,” they wrote.

The case centered on the makeup of the Galveston County Commissioners Court, which consists of four county commissioners elected from districts and a county executive, called a judge, elected by the entire county. Until the new lines were drawn, Black and Hispanic residents made up a majority in one of the four commissioner districts for three decades.

In Galveston County, 58 percent of the voting-age population is White, 22.5 percent is Hispanic and 12.5 percent is Black, according to the decision. Hispanic voters are spread across the county, while Black voters are concentrated in the heart of the county.

The ruling is binding on the three states in the New Orleans-based appeals court’s jurisdiction — Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

The case was brought by voters with the help of branches of the NAACP and the League of United Latin American Citizens. They did not immediately say Thursday whether they planned to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. County officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Aaron Schaffer, Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

This week saw the major equity averages continue a confirmed pullback phase, with some of the biggest gainers in the first half of 2024 logging some major losses. Is this one of the most buyable dips of the year? Or is this just the beginning of a protracted decline with much more pain to come for investors?

Today, we’ll walk through four potential outcomes for the S&P 500 index over the next six to eight weeks. As I share each of these four future paths, I’ll describe the market conditions that would likely be involved, and I’ll also share my estimated probability for each scenario.

By the way, we conducted a similar exercise for the S&P 500 back in April, and you may be surprised to see which scenario actually played out!

And remember, the point of this exercise is threefold:

  1. Consider all four potential future paths for the index, think about what would cause each scenario to unfold in terms of the macro drivers, and review what signals/patterns/indicators would confirm the scenario.
  2. Decide which scenario you feel is most likely, and why you think that’s the case. Don’t forget to drop me a comment and let me know your vote!
  3. Think about how each of the four scenarios would impact your current portfolio. How would you manage risk in each case? How and when would you take action to adapt to this new reality?

Let’s start with the most optimistic scenario, involving the S&P 500 making yet another new all-time high as the bullish trend resumes.

Option 1: The Super Bullish Scenario

Our first scenario would mean that the brief pullback phase is now over, and the S&P 500 and Nasdaq would power to new all-time highs in August. By early September, we’d be talking about the resurgence of the Magnificent 7 names, reflecting on how the markets in 2024 have diverged so much from the traditional seasonal patterns, and discussing the likelihood of the S&P finishing 2024 above the 6000 level.

Dave’s Vote: 5%

Option 2: The Mildly Bullish Scenario

What if the Magnificent 7 stocks take a backseat to other sectors, such as financials and industrials? If the value trade continues to work, as we’ve observed in the last couple weeks, we could see a scenario where lots of stocks are working well but it’s not enough to propel the equity benchmarks much higher. The S&P 500 wouldn’t see much downside in this scenario and would spend the next six to eight weeks between 5400 and 5650.

Dave’s vote: 15%

Option 3: The Mildly Bearish Scenario

How about a scenario where this pullback continues to plague the equity markets, but the pace of the decline lightens up a bit? The mega-cap growth stocks continue to struggle, but we don’t see those full risk-off signals and the VIX remains below 20. By early September, we’re down about 10% overall off the July high, but investors are licking their lips about a potential Q4 rally into year-end 2024.

Dave’s vote: 60%

Option 4: The Super Bearish Scenario

You always need to consider an incredibly bearish scenario, if only to remind yourself that it’s a possibility, even a very unlikely one! What if this pullback is just getting started, the S&P 500 fails to hold the 5000 level, and we see a break below the 200-day moving average? That would mean a similar pullback to what we experienced in August and September 2023, and while we’re talking about the potential for a Q4 rally, we’re all way more concerned that there’s even more downside to be had before it’s all said and done.

Dave’s vote: 20%

What probabilities would you assign to each of these four scenarios? Check out the video below, and then drop a comment with which scenario you select and why!

RR#6,

Dave

PS- Ready to upgrade your investment process? Check out my free behavioral investing course!

David Keller, CMT

Chief Market Strategist

StockCharts.com

Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional. 

The author does not have a position in mentioned securities at the time of publication.   Any opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not in any way represent the views or opinions of any other person or entity.

The S&P 500 index ($SPX) is a capitalization-weighted stock index. Many lesser capitalization blue-chip stocks that compose these 500 companies have been performance laggards. Though smaller companies in the index, these corporations are among the bluest of the blue-chip stocks. These prestigious corporations have been overshadowed by the immense mega-capitalization companies that have received attention from institutional and individual investors. For the most part, these other and forgotten stocks have better valuations and dividend yields as they have been somewhat neglected by Wall Street.

The Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) provides a perspective highlighting these smaller blue-chip stocks in the index. Does this equal-weighted index reveal a market story obscured by the mega-cap dominated S&P 500 index?

S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP), Point & Figure Chart Study

S&P 500 Equal Weighted ETF (RSP) PnF Chart Notes:

  • In 2022, an Accumulation Structure began to form.
  • Markup began in 2023 and still continues.
  • Three Horizontal PnF counts are estimated here.
  • Two partial counts confirm each other in the $186 price zone.
  • The entire width of the structure counts to $260.

NASDAQ 100 Index ($NDX) with Relative Strength to the S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP)

This daily chart of the NASDAQ 100 Index ($NDX) illustrates the start and end of the second-quarter rally. A final ThrowOver of the channel line clocks in just as the quarter is ending and the third quarter is beginning. A sudden and sharp reversal is evidence of the rotation away from this mega-cap dominated index and into the broad list of blue chip stocks in the S&P 500 Equal Weighted Index. The Relative Strength line reveals the shift.

Broad market rotations can destabilize markets as funds flow away from prior leadership toward new investment themes. Watch for emerging leadership from industry groups and stocks while markets are generally correcting. Point & Figure horizontal counts can help greatly with price projection estimates. However, we must remember that PnF cannot estimate the time needed to reach potential price objectives.

All the Best,

Bruce

@rdwyckoff

Prior Blog Notes: At the end of June, I published a NASDAQ 100 PnF chart study as it was reaching price objectives. The price of the objective range was 19,600 / 20,800. On July 10th the $NDX peaked at 20,690.97, just as the new quarter was beginning. (click here to view the chart study). 

Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional. 

Wyckoff Resources:

Additional Wyckoff Resources (Click Here)

Wyckoff Market Discussion (Click Here)

Nvidia (NVDA) was perhaps the most outstanding semiconductor trade of 2024. While some people might have missed out, there are still plenty of chances to get in. 

But it’s also wise to look for a diversified alternative. And to that end, the trade that’s flashing a potential opportunity is the VanEck Vectors Semiconductor ETF (SMH).

Why Consider Investing in SMH?

SMH has outperformed the S&P 500 ($SPX) over the last 10 years. It’s deeply diversified within the cyclical semiconductor space, and it carries exposure not only to top-quality chip stocks but also to those on the cutting edge of the AI industry.

SMH: Four Ways to Look At It

SMH has broken below the measured move of a double-top reversal. Does this present a threat of further downside or an opportunity to buy the bounce? 

The fundamental bias is bullish on long-term tech and AI demand. The technical bias, also bullish, is toward finding areas of support for a potential buy. 

Here are four ways to look at it:

1—SMH: Analyst Price Targets for 2025

Based on several rating sites, analyst price targets for SMH in 2025 are as follows (you can follow this ACP chart by clicking here).

High Estimates

  • $451.50 
  • $380.60 

Average Estimates

  • $357.32 
  • $300.68 

Low Estimates

  • $263.14 
  • $227.98 

2—SMH: Simple Moving Averages and Support

Looking at the chart below, SMH blasted through both the 50-day and 100-day simple moving averages (SMAs). Reading the price action from a swing trader’s perspective, those who went short at the bottom of the double-top formation likely covered their positions upon reaching 100% of the measured move near the 100-day SMA. That probably accounted for the bounce.

CHART 1. DAILY CHART OF SMH. The 50, 100, and 200-day simple moving averages are still in “full sail.”

But if you look at the last four candles, you can see that the July 30, 2024, candle took out the bottom of the last swing low (three sessions prior). This tells you that neither the near-term swing low nor the 100-day SMA will likely serve as reliable support levels.

While the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) tells you that selling pressure prevails, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) also hints at the possibility that the current move may dip into “oversold” territory. Might this indicate a potential bounce? If so, might you have to wait until SMH approaches the 200-day SMA before seeing a strong reversal candle and a change in momentum?

3—SMH: Ichimoku Cloud and Volume-by-Price

Looking at the chart below, the Ichimoku Cloud projected a thickening bullish range of support but now looks to be turning red. Plus, price pierced the bottom of the cloud, which suggests bearish.

CHART 2. DAILY CHART OF SMH WITH ICHIMOKU CLOUD AND VOLUME-BY-PRICE. This gives a better indication of a potential range of support. 

But since the cloud is plotted to indicate range, this scenario is somewhat tempered by the Volume-by-Price indicator, which, too, offers a way to view a potential zone of support (and resistance) by way of strong areas of concentrated market activity. According to it, SMH has just entered a strong zone of prior market action. Whether there will be a reversal within this range or a more contentious and congestive back-and-forth as bulls and bears aim to seize direction—this is something to watch. Dropping below this range may render it a resistance level, suggesting further downside. 

Lastly, you might want to examine the price action from another angle, one that might give you a more specific reading of levels.

4—SMH: Short Term vs Long-Term Fibonacci Retracements

The chart shows two sets of Fibonacci retracements: A long-term Fib from the November 2023 low to the July 2024 high, and a short-term Fib from the April 2024 to the July high of the same year.

CHART 3. DAILY CHART OF SMH: Compare the short-term and long-term Fib retracements; both highlight a single actionable zone that aligns with the chart above.

Taking an educated guess on the action based on these levels:

  • Short-term bulls attempted to enter at $230 as it coincided with the short-term 61.8% retracement level (which is arguably a favorable low entry point). 
  • The $230 price level also coincides with the longer-term Fib 38.2%, which, for longer-term traders, is an early buy point for those looking to get in on the long side.
  • If the price can’t hold above $230, then short-term traders may liquidate their positions, as this would invalidate the case for a short-term trade.
  • Those with a longer-term perspective, however, would probably begin piling in at $210 which is where the longer-term 50% Fib level is located. 
  • $200 is a crucial support level, matching the April swing low. A drop below this would challenge any bullish outlook despite the 61.8% Fib level traditionally being a valid entry point below this price.

At the Close

The VanEck Vectors Semiconductor ETF (SMH) offers a compelling opportunity on the long side. Despite recent technical challenges, the fundamental picture remains bullish due to strong long-term demand for tech and AI. Plus, analyst price targets for 2025 are optimistic. However, there are specific price levels below which can invalidate such a bullish thesis. The bullish opportunity SMH presents presents itself at a vulnerable juncture, so keep an eye on those levels. 


Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional.

One of the few things working in Iran’s favor after the humiliating news that Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in the Iranian capital overnight is that the regime controls most of the information the world gets to see.

What Iran has said so far is that Haniyeh died after being hit by an “airborne guided projectile” in Tehran where he was attending the inauguration of the Iranian president. But we know little else. Israel has not claimed responsibility for the strike but has previously vowed to eliminate Hamas and its leaders following the October 7 attacks.

Haniyeh’s death came hours after Israel confirmed it carried out a strike in Beirut, Lebanon, on Tuesday that killed the most senior military commander of Hezbollah, another Iranian-backed militant group, who it blamed for a deadly attack in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

The precise details of what happened at around 2 a.m. (5.30 p.m. ET) in Tehran, will dictate what comes next, as Iran looks to present a narrative that justifies and fashions its response.

Whatever the truth and whatever Iran proffers, the attack is clearly a grave violation of its sovereignty and the supposed security bubble of the Iranian capital. Haniyeh was the regime’s guest, and its role as a regional power is compromised if it’s unable to guarantee the simple safety of visiting allies.

There are reports he was staying in a guest house for veterans, and it is unclear whose technical responsibility it was to protect this facility – and whether the elite Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) will be explicitly embarrassed, outside of the wider humiliation of an apparent Israeli assassination deep inside of Iran.

But Iran has stomached comparable violations in the past. The death of its leading nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was met with limited wrath in 2020. The killing of Quds commander Qasem Suleinami, the country’s most fabled military figure, months earlier, led to fiery rhetoric, but instead a limited hit on a remote US base. Iran has stepped back before – and may do so again.

There is no shortage of furious rherotic the day after the strikes, but there is no easy route for Iran. It is clear Tehran has been reluctant, for the months since October 7, to launch its most ferocious proxy, Hezbollah, into a full-scale war with Israel from Lebanon. Putting aside the huge humanitarian horror such a conflict would muster for Lebanese and Israelis alike, Hezbollah remains a powerful card that Tehran gets to play probably once. The regime retains apparent ambitions in its nuclear program and a military eroded by sanctions, so Hezbollah is an ace that must be tabled with astute timing.

Iran has also tried an unprecedented direct all-out attack on Israel before, in April, after senior IRGC commanders were killed in an Israeli strike on Damascus. In short, the 300 drone and missiles fired – straight from Iran at Israel – just didn’t get through. Around 99% of them were intercepted.

The regime’s response to Haniyeh’s death will define its role as a regional power, and, if it fails to appear potent enough, risks that slipping. A stealthy, asymmetric strike, weeks from now, may not fix the damage done to its prestige.

The risk of the unchartered territory we are in is that the gravity of expected responses is not defined – the tit for tat is occurring in an environment evolving by the day. Indeed, the characters making the decisions are changing rapidly, or under intense domestic pressure themselves. This simply accentuates the risk of miscalculation, or of actions taken to satisfy selfish, insular concerns, rather than a wider regional impact. In short, it is a mess that grows, and with it surges the chance of the unexpected.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s first statement on the matter said of Israel, “You killed our dear guest in our house and now have paved the way for your harsh punishment.” But remember this is a superannuated, octogenarian leader who has just endured years of popular unrest and rising conflict with Israel, and 24 hours ago saw a surprisingly moderate president, Masoud Pezeshkian, get sworn in. He is projecting strength internally as much as he is internationally.

Separately, Hezbollah had stumbled it seemed into an acute crisis though the militant group’s apparently mistaken targeting of Druze schoolchildren in the Golan Heights at the weekend. It may feel the strike on Haniyeh has removed the spotlight to respond, for the shortest while, although it may be dragged into Iran’s eventual response. But the fact the assassination of its commander, Fuad Shukr, now seems like a distant memory, exposing how rapidly events are unfolding.

Tehran is taking its time to reveal how, yet again, its innermost sanctum was violated by Israel. The IRGC trailed a statement about Haniyeh at 2.50 a.m. US time, but it eventually avoided most details of how he was killed. Perhaps it doesn’t know, or doesn’t want to say, or is working out what to say in order to find a response that fits – and that it can execute.

Still, red lines have been criss-crossed for months, and this morning we lept a few rungs higher up the ladder of escalation. The agonizing question of the next 24 hours – as Iran fashions its narrative of how this major humiliation came to be – is what remaining steps are there on this well-trodden ladder, and what is at its peak?

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Russia has launched one of the largest drone attacks on Ukraine since the war began, mainly targeting overnight the region in and around the capital Kyiv, according to the Ukrainian military, which said all 89 drones fired were shot down.

It marks the largest attack on the capital so far this year, and the seventh time Russia has targeted Kyiv this month, military officials said on Wednesday.

The “massive” attack lasted more than seven hours and the drones came in two waves, Kyiv officials said, adding that “not a single drone reached its target.”

There were no hits to residential or critical infrastructure and no casualties in the Kyiv region, according to regional military head Ruslan Kravchenko. However, 13 houses were damaged and rescuers extinguished one fire caused by the downed drones. “The majority of the UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] debris fell outside of the settlements,” he added.

Dramatic video released by the Ukrainian Air Force shows one drone on fire, falling from the sky and landing in a field — causing a large cloud of smoke but no visible damage.

Russia also attacked the country’s Mykolaiv region with an X-59 guided missile from the airspace of the occupied Kherson region, which Ukraine said it also shot down. However, separate attacks on eastern and southern Ukraine killed at least two people Wednesday morning.

The Kremlin did not comment on the attacks in its regular briefing with reporters on Wednesday.

Repeated calls for more air defense systems

Ukrainian Air Force Commander Mykola Oleshchuk called the drone barrage targeting Kyiv “one of the most massive attacks by Shahed-131/136” drones, comparing it to the Russian attack on New Year’s Eve in which 90 Shaheds were launched.

“Just like then, today the Ukrainian air defense has withstood and repelled a massive attack by enemy drones,” he said. “Mobile fire groups of all the Ukrainian Defence Forces, tactical aviation of the Air Force and Army Aviation of the Land Forces, anti-aircraft missile units and electronic warfare units of the Air Force were involved in repelling the air attack.”

During another wave of aerial attacks days before the New Year’s Eve holiday, Russia fired an unprecedented number of drones and missiles at targets across Ukraine, killing at least 31 people and injuring more than 150 others, according to Ukrainian officials at the time.

Since then, Ukraine has repeatedly pleaded for allies to provide more air defense systems.

“Ukrainians can fully protect their skies from Russian strikes when they have sufficient supplies,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Wednesday.

“The same level of defense is needed against Russian missiles and the occupier’s combat aircraft. And this can be achieved. We need sufficiently courageous decisions from our partners — enough air defense systems, enough range,” Zelensky added. “And Ukrainians will do everything correctly and precisely.”

The Biden administration announced on Monday a new lethal aid package for Ukraine totaling about $1.7 billion and largely consisting of missiles and ammunition for missile, artillery and air defense systems that the US has previously provided to Ukraine.

Deaths in eastern and southern Ukraine

In southern Ukraine, a 68-year-old man in Kherson was killed in a drone strike on Wednesday morning, according to the region’s military head. A 73-year-old woman was also injured in that attack, and elsewhere in the region three people were injured in Russian shelling, the official said.

In the Donetsk region, one resident in the city of Toretsk was killed, and four others were injured in attacks elsewhere.

Ukraine’s Armed Forces said it will “continue to effectively hit important military targets of the Russian occupiers,” claiming that on Tuesday night Ukraine carried out a strike on a weapons and military equipment storage facility near the city of Kursk, Russia.

The governor of Russia’s Kursk region said a fire broke out at a facility there “after an attack by the Ukrainian armed forces.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

The assassination of the political leader of Hamas has plunged the Middle East into fresh crisis and dented already slim hopes of an end to the war between Israel and the militant group that rules Gaza anytime soon.

Hamas on Wednesday said Israel killed its political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran, Iran, hours after Israel claimed a strike on the Lebanese capital Beirut that killed a senior Hezbollah commander who it blamed for a deadly attack in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights over the weekend. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied responsibility for Haniyeh’s killing.

Experts say the assassinations throw an ominous shadow on efforts to procure a ceasefire-hostage deal in Gaza, as well as hopes of de-escalation between Israel and its Iran-backed rivals in the region.

Here’s what the killing of the Hamas and Hezbollah leaders means for the Gaza war and the region.

Future of ceasefire talks unclear

Months of negotiations on a deal to end the war in Gaza and free the remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas had already hit repeated roadblocks before Haniyeh, a key player in the talks, was killed on Tuesday night.

As recently as early July, Haniyeh was in touch with mediators in Qatar and Egypt to discuss ideas on ending the war, sparking some hope that the two sides could be on the brink of a framework agreement.

All of that could now be thrown up in the air by his death.

“He was someone who saw the value of a deal and was instrumental to getting certain breakthroughs in the talks,” the source said, adding that “at this stage, it’s unclear what the effect will be on ceasefire talks.”

Qatar’s Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, a key mediator in the Israel-Hamas talks, wrote on X: “Political assassinations and continued targeting of civilians in Gaza while talks continue leads us to ask, how can mediation succeed when one party assassinates the negotiator on the other side?”

Qatar, which has helped release some of the Israeli hostages, sheltered the Hamas leader before his death, and the group’s political bureau has been based in its capital Doha since 2012.

Questions will also be asked about the calculations of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who many observers – including families of the hostages – have accused of deliberately stalling on negotiations and dragging out the war to safeguard his own political survival.

“Netanyahu has systematically sabotaged ceasefire talks because ending the war will likely end his political career,” said Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute, a US-based foreign policy think tank, in a post on X. “The assassination buys Netanyahu several weeks, if not months, in which there will be no serious expectation of a ceasefire deal.”

Gershon Baskin, a former Israeli hostage negotiator who once acted as a channel to Hamas, noted that negotiations were already deadlocked even before the assassination of Haniyeh.

Now, Baskin said, it is unclear how much longer Qatari and Egyptian mediators will allow themselves “to be played by Israel and Hamas,” adding that it may be time for the mediators to put a deal on the table and ask parties to “take it or leave it.”

A faltered negotiation process also extends the risk to the lives of the remaining hostages in Gaza.

The Hostages Families Forum said Wednesday that “true achievement” in the war can only be realized with the release of all hostages still in captivity, saying they “implore the Israeli government and global leaders to decisively advance negotiations.”

“Time is of the essence,” the Forum said in a statement. “This is the time for a deal.”

There are 111 hostages still in Gaza, including 39 believed to be dead, according to data from Netanyahu’s office. Their families have repeatedly slammed Netanyahu for failing to secure their release.

No respite for the suffering in Gaza

Without a ceasefire, Gaza’s besieged population will find no respite from the war, which has so far killed more than 39,000 people, according to the health ministry in the strip. Swathes of the territory have been flattened, and a humanitarian crisis is rapidly spiraling out of control.

The war, which Israel launched in response to Hamas’ October 7 attacks that killed 1,200 people, has also displaced almost all of Gaza’s population of 2 million, with 86% of the territory now under Israeli evacuation orders.

Qatar’s foreign ministry on Wednesday said Haniyeh’s killing “would lead to the region sliding into a cycle of chaos and undermine the chances of peace.”

Egypt, a key mediator in the conflict but whose ties with Israel have been strained since October 7, had condemned what it called “Israel’s dangerous policy of escalation” and warned against “the nonsense policy of assassination and violation of the sovereignty of states.”

In a statement, Egypt said the two killings risk “igniting” confrontation in the region.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said the United States was “not aware of or involved in” Haniyeh’s killing and that the Biden administration had been working “from day one” for a ceasefire to prevent the conflict from spreading to other regions.

HA Hellyer, scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies in London, said that unless there is an active effort to cool tensions in the region, “escalation will happen by, unfortunately, default.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com