In other news

I don't think he's planning to pay for it.

A guy I met through whiskey collecting is a big wig at one of the foreign aid place funded through USAID. He said there are about 600,000 people out of jobs right now because of the USAID upheaval. They laid off about 500 people the past few months. Now the money is back and they are supposed to rehire and re-lease and re everything like nothing ever happened.

They can't rehire people they fired because of the way USAID funding works. Many of the companies are already dissolved

I asked if he thought it was political theater or the courts and he didn't know.

He felt like they might be trying to kill the competition and install their own conservative NGOs, which he said is that the Liberals did with all the refugee orgs

Ignoring the fact that CNBC is barely even left of centre, the Walter Bloomberg tweet was their source for the reporting so the quote tweet coordi posted was accurate. The market bounce also appears to have begun before it was picked up by CNBC (and then Reuters) anyway, although obviously the major outlets picking it up will have amplified it somewhat.

Coordi is wrong about the Deltaone vs DeItaone thing though, DeItaOne is the genuine, somewhat respected account but he has no relation to the Bloomberg company and apparently picked it up from some minor trading company misconstruing Kevin Hassett's comments in an interview on Fox. He also apparently only posted it when he had seen the market react, which seems accurate given the tweet was at 10:13 and the market was already up significantly by then.

I think basically the market is just ridiculously volatile at present and the root cause in this instance was people way overreacting to a no comment response by Hassett when questioned about the possibility of a pause, while the reporting by CNBC and even the tweet they based it off all occurred after the huge bounce had largely already happened.

Hey Will, haven't seen you around in a while, good to see you're still posting.

I didn't read this forum for months but got pulled back in by some of the chaos over the last month or so. Trying not to spend too much time here but posting a bit.

CNBC admitted to having spread unconfirmed informations
/
A spokesperson for CNBC told Fox News Digital, "As we were chasing the news of the market moves in real-time, we aired unconfirmed information in a banner. Our reporters quickly made a correction on air."

https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/cnbc-i...

Twitter accounts write random stuff all the times, it's when major "mainstream" platforms give credibility to those that they have impact.

Retail got slaughtered there because they came in at top of the rapid wave of increases (which was mostly short covering by institutionals) after MSM stamp of credibility on the information, then a few min later we got the white house denial.

Granted the tweet's not totally wrong in that if you ask Trump anything "Are you considering outlawing birth control?" he'll just word vomit yes because he doesn;t know anything.

I'm not sure what your point is. Yes CNBC spread the misleading information but the massive bounce happened almost entirely before even the tweet that was their source for the information, let alone the time CNBC actually aired it.

You could argue that the main impact of MSM picking up the viral falsehood was actually that reality was restored more quickly as it meant the official denial happened sooner than it otherwise might have. It's still a pretty severe ****up to air something like that but it ultimately had very little to do with the actual spike in the market since the spike had already happened by that point (at least 75% of the spike had happened before anything was on CNBC).

Even so - who cares? How is it nefarious at all? What would CNBC's agenda be? Financial things get reported all the time that move the market - albeit not usually this big of a swing - and then turn out to be not true.

But what would have fox done?

Fox had the actual interview which was misconstrued and didn't report it as an open-ness to delay the tariffs.

Have you checked what the original claim was? that it had happened because twitter allows people with "8 dollars" to be there and spam random stuff.

https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1j...

A mob of plain clothes officers in unmarked cars doing a "wellness check" on a legal status immigrant

That claim might not have been entirely justified but it is certainly a lot closer to being accurate than the claim "a stalwart leftist source was responsible for one of the biggest **** up in news history (in terms of actual damage generated)."

And?

which it was, unlike twitter

Volatile markets are highly susceptible to overreactions and panic, especially when recession or even depression looms.

While any news organization should be held responsible for vetting what they write, we also know that they will all make errors. Nobody is perfect.

This incident is just one more argument against volatile markets and the policies that create them.

And to reiterate, the market had already gone crazy before it was even reported by CNBC. Their reporting had minimal impact on the damage, it was driven by the rumours circulating between traders/on Twitter - the volatility of the market meant that the damage was done within minutes of the rumours spreading; before those rumours even made it to any MSM.

And a president that is very poor at communicating and unsure of himself or what he's doing. Nobody really knows what's going to happen in a few weeks and not because of outside forces. Purely because Trump is uneducated and capricious on these matters.

https://apnews.com/video/man-talks-about...

Only took 4 brave warriors to down a small kid behind a fence.

Hold on to that while you can.

Small kid ? Looks like a teenager. Though I do not care if this was an adult there is a fence and why are you not diffusing and assessing the situation. Taser has to be the no brainer here

They should be charged

it's actually crazy how many pussies become cops

FYP.