Sweet

One for the traders.

With Putin nobody knows unfortunately. I hope Trump can end the thing, but I don’t think he will be able to.

Disagree, actually for the reasons you stated. Hard men like Putin only respect power. Too little too late I fear though.

It's quite amazing how little this is being reported on.

Not good news: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0dpdx420lo

This made me laugh. Good list John, won’t be starting a bank anytime soon.

There are too many to mention but thanks to all that commented.

Thanks @Saluki I’m using two factor authentication so I have that layer of added protection. They have to either get a code sent to my phone or use an Authenticator app. @Blugoldsyes I think I’m probably going to change my email address and the accounts linked to it. Something long and new and only at my for my investing should reduce visibility. @Xerxes it’s my investing accounts, not my banking accounts. Even if they get into my email there would still be a few hurdles to pass before they got into my investing accounts. Yes @Ulti someone recommended me protonmail. I read that it is better for privacy but I’m not seeing it more secure from getting hacked. Do they have two-factor authentication etc?

Hi all. This is an important topic which I am sure some of you have grappled with so I'm hoping for some advice. I have an outlook email address and all my investing accounts are registered to it. My email must have been in a data leak because I can see from my recent activity that someone other than me is trying to access my outlook account - there have been numerous attempts in the past few days to break into my account but they have gotten the password wrong. I have two-factor authentication on, so even if they did get my password they cannot access my email without an authentication code. Does anyone have any recommendations on what I should do? Should I change email account? Is outlook the best email to link your account to or are there any more secure? More generally, is there anything you do to keep your investing accounts secure? Cheers

Anyone ever think about these? I think they are all types of funds that sell calls on the stocks within the indices or the indices themselves. I’ve looked at some other covered call ETFs but kept away because I just feel they are a blowup risk.

Give me a break. Have you ever meet anyone in retail who doesn’t try to inflate their real estate asset prices when negotiating sales or financing deals? Don’t take my word for it:

I find this a crazy take.

Isn’t elections always about the lesser of two evils? When one side believes Trump is Hitler you can see why they vote against Trump, some push politically motivated prosecutions, some even try to kill him.

Generally speaking? I don’t know if he follows the law or not. In this specific case I’d lean towards the view that he would have paid Daniel’s regardless of his presidency bid - he has a record of doing just that which means no case to answer to. Normally this type of campaign finance violation is taken up by the DOJ or the FEC, but it wasn’t, and what’s not normal is a politically motivated prosecutor in a Democratic state taking on a federal issue. Bragg has many quotes saying he was going to get Trump, he’s not impartial. It was prosecuted in Manhattan, one of the most Democrat leaning places in the US and the jury almost certainly leaned that way. Trump is a polarising political figure, if the jury is biased the trial can’t be fair. No actions were taken to try ensure he got a jury of his peers - i.e. Dems and Reps in equal amounts. The payment occurred in 2016 beyond New York’s own statue of limitation laws for these crimes. They found a way around the law, which (I think - could be wrong) was to link the book keeping entry of it a year later. But if he didn’t commit a campaign finance crime then there is no book keeping crime. The main witness is Michael Cohen, a convicted liar who also lied on the stand by saying he had nothing to gain from Trump’s conviction, even though he had made lots of money talking about Trump. It has been reported that there were a range of irregularities pre-trial and during the trial… but I don’t really know enough about the legal cases to know what is normal - so I ignore but mention. Overall I’d side with others. If this wasn’t Trump it wouldn’t be brought. If it was outside of NYC there would be no conviction. The DA was politically motivated - clearly.

The crux is whether Trump's money to Daniels was a campaign donation, and whether it fell foul of breaking campaign finance laws. I explained this earlier so I don't know why you are asking if I understand the legal standard. I don't have anything to correct on my point of being able to discuss the merits of verdicts. Juries judge, Judges judge - verdicts are what is challenged and what I was referring to (clearly I might add). There is nobody gaslighting you Buck. If you don't know what gaslighting means look it up. I'd appreciate it if you used it appropriately. And yes I am sure white-collar crime is complicated... so what though. Overall I'm pleased that you are allowing us to speak about the convictions.

I'm surprised at how unsporting your response was buck. I don't like your attempt to off-limit discussions by appealing to 'white collar crime is extremely complex' - I don't accept those manufactured boundaries. It's deliberately avoiding specifics by generalising. I posted about the cases in the UK because those also involve complex law and complex cases, but we don't limit discussion on them because its hard to understand. Especially not when they are important. That's the thread of relevance. Paying hush money in and off itself is not a crime buck. You don't seem to know this.

Buckeye, I am from the UK not the US. In the UK we have people doing time in jail for social media posts, you can read about the three-year jail term this fella received here: "'Keyboard warrior' jailed for part in UK disorder" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y3gre3y9yo We have another person, Lucy Letby, convicted of killing many young babies in a hospital, since her conviction many experts have cast doubt on the evidence used to convict her. I don't know if she is guilty or not but I am illustrating this point. What is a crime, what is not, is there a miscarriage of justice, what the punishment should be - that should be up for debate in both your country and mine. We are democracies, in democracies we discuss and question the verdicts of judges. It's important we can have those discussion. It's a live discussion in the UK right now, many including myself believe there are people in jail in the UK today that should not be. Back to Trump. He was convicted for a hush money payment to Daniels because it was viewed as an undeclared campaign expense. This despite the fact that Trump has a long history of paying hush money long before he ran for president: "Donald Trump's Long History of Paying for Silence" (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/donald-trumps-long-history-with-hush-money/550745/). And that's the grey area, would he have made this payment if he weren't running for president, if the answer is yes then there is no case to answer for. If you don't know the specifics of this case how can you be so sure of yourself?

Convicted yes. Was it an actual crime... debatable. Could be overturned.

You could be correct Orthopa, I just think the history of this suggest that getting it released is unlikely give the history. I still think it is more likely the current share structure is wiped. I think we could see a half way where current holders could get something as part of a new ownership structure.

Lol, I’d be on clenbuterol tomorrow and would be walking at 5% in a couple of months

More Shitty bank

I hope you are right John. Europe has the ability to be a major player in defence. We let the Americans do too much for us and it has made us soft. Hope that is changing.

It wasn’t as bad as I thought it might be, I hope it is toughened further and I hope trump will back his threat up if negotiations fail. Fundamentally though, still think we Europeans need to do more.

Think this is it John, the details are slightly different from what I remembered though: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-reviews-plan-halt-us-military-aid-ukraine-unless-it-negotiates-peace-with-2024-06-25/

There was an article several months ago, I think in reuters as well, that advisers to Trump would present to Putin a plan, and if Putin did not agree to it, the Trump admin would provide Ukraine with anything and everything it wants militarily.