WHY INVESTING IN 'TRUMP STOCKS' OR 'CLINTON STOCKS' IS A WASTED VOTE.

Many investors have taken to wondering how they might cash in on “Trump stocks” or “Clinton stocks.” Truth is, trying to divine which stocks will benefit after November’s presidential election is frivolous and even dangerous to your wealth. The folly of trying to turn current events into investment hunches just played out on a grand scale in Great Britain, where bookies and investing experts alike were sure that the vote to leave the European Union would be defeated. Moreover, if Brexit passed, the British stock markets would tank. The oddsmakers were wrong, and so were the market observers, because although Brexit triggered a knee-jerk downward reaction, the British stock market then raced off to record highs. The Brexit investment-wager silliness subsided just as the Republican and Democratic presidential conventions ramped up, which is why the popular sport right now in the financial media and on the talk shows is to cover what stocks to buy for each presidential contender, and which industries are likely to prosper with their election. Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, for example, picked the seven “best stocks” for each candidate’s potential presidency. Companies tied to Trump included Coach – because Trump plans to cut taxes on high earners, so they will have disposable income, and for-profit prison operator The Geo Group (because of his law-and-order pledge) and gun-maker Smith & Wesson . Clinton stocks included HCA Holdings Inc. SunPower and Wal-Mart Stores, due to her support of the Affordable Care Act, a pledge to install 500 million solar panels by 2021, and plans for tax cuts for low- and middle-income earners. Likewise, S&P Global Market Intelligence issued a research report about how the election could disrupt certain sectors. While noting that neither candidate may have the juice after election to follow through on their campaign promises, the firm nonetheless tied key issues to market sectors. Accordingly, consumer-discretionary stocks could be impacted by the outcome of minimum-wage legislation (more likely hurt by Clinton and helped by Trump), health care by the Affordable Care Act (helped by Clinton and hurt by Trump) and industrials, aided by defense spending (both candidates are seen as hawkish, thus good for industrial companies).

Purported analysis abounds, with some experts suggesting that it’s time to make moves now, because the swings that could occur once the outcome is clear could be major. Market strategist Lawrence McDonald said this week on my show, “MoneyLife with Chuck Jaffe,” that we “must prepare ourselves for a Trump presidency.” He made it clear he was not making a political statement, but that he believes “social tensions are playing right into Trump” and that he expects the vote won’t be close. McDonald suggested that, among other things, a Trump win would trigger a major sell-off in Treasurys, meaning investors would “want to start getting out of bonds.” By comparison, McDonald noted that a Clinton presidency, from an investor’s perspective, would offer “more of what you have right now.” But for any long-term investor, the idea that you would overhaul a portfolio on the whims of the voters is ridiculous. David Trainer, president of New Constructs Inc., an investment-research firm, called the political plays being discussed now, “Yet another baseless theme to encourage investors to trade on non-fundamental but entertaining factors. In the end, the result is mostly that unsophisticated investors further line the pockets of the more-sophisticated investors that create baseless trends to exploit them.” It’s a bit like using the Super Bowl indicator — where the direction of the stock market for the year is supposedly foretold by the outcome of the game — and putting real money behind what amounts to a coincidence. Sure, history shows that this coincidence occurs about 80% of the time — there are some variations in how the Super Bowl indicator is tallied, giving comfort to true believers — but you still wouldn’t want to lay down big market bets after just three quarters, when the game is too close to call. Making Trump or Clinton stock plays right now is no different; interesting to talk about, dumb to wager on, and dangerous as a basis to overhaul a portfolio now. That said, there are plenty of studies to show that U.S. presidential election years typically coincide with favorable markets, and that the market’s long-term trends don’t seem to be affected by the party that holds the presidency. Ignoring logic to invest on the outcome of a political event and its potential impact makes no sense. Investors would be better off looking at the fundamentals of the companies that pique their interest, although that takes work that betting on a political kick doesn’t. “As a short-term trade you can find a reason to buy or sell anything, whether it’s a newly elected president or the NCAA tournament,” said Brian Frank, manager of the Frank Value Fund “Long-term, your buy valuation and fundamentals are the only thing that matter.” So enjoy the conversations about which stocks may profit from politics, but don’t bet on them without first removing your red- or blue-tinted blinders and making sure you invest in a solid business or industry that can succeed regardless of who is in the White House..

POLICE UNION: CLINTON SNUBBED US .

Top officials at the biggest police union in the country are upset with Hillary Clinton, saying she snubbed them. The leader of the National Fraternal Order of Police told The Hill that the Democrat sent a signal through her staff that she wouldn't be seeking the union's endorsement. "It sends a powerful message. To be honest with you, I was disappointed and shocked," said Chuck Canterbury, the president of the National Fraternal Order of Police. "You would think with law enforcement issues so much in the news that even if she had disagreements with our positions, that she would've been willing to say that." Clinton's opponent, Donald Trump, is now actively seeking the union's support as he trumpets a "law and order" message on the campaign tail. Canterbury spoke to The Hill in a telephone interview Friday, shortly after he left Trump Tower in Manhattan. He and other leaders of the police union - which says it represents 335,000 members - visited with Trump on Friday morning to sound out the Republican nominee about his positions on issues of importance to law enforcement officers. Politico first reported the meeting. The union will not be meeting with Clinton because her campaign decided not to fill out a questionnaire that is required for seeking the police union's endorsement. "We were talking to the highest levels of the campaign, and we had all indications that she was going to return the questionnaire," Canterbury said. "And on the deadline date we were advised that they declined." The Fraternal Order of Police has a strict process for making a presidential endorsement.

It first sends each candidate a lengthy questionnaire; after the candidates complete and return their questionnaires, the union distributes the answers to its membership. Finally, in September, the state chapters vote, and if a candidate receives majority support in two-thirds of the states, he or she wins the union's endorsement. This year, only Trump's campaign filled out the questionnaire. Canterbury says that to his knowledge the questionnaire snub has only happened once before - in 2004 with John Kerry. He said President Obama submitted the questionnaire in both 2008 and 2012. The last time the Fraternal Order of Police endorsed a Democrat for president was Bill Clinton in 1996, Canterbury said. In 2000 and 2004, the union endorsed George W. Bush, and in 2008 it supported John McCain. In 2012, the union endorsed neither Obama nor Mitt Romney because neither could command a two-thirds majority of states, he said. Asked about the decision not to seek the police union's endorsement, Clinton spokesman Jesse Ferguson said, "Throughout her career, Hillary Clinton has been committed to our law enforcement officers." "As she said from the beginning of her campaign, across the country, police officers are out there every day inspiring trust and confidence, honorably doing their duty, putting themselves on the line to save lives. "She believes we must work together to build on what's working and to build the bonds of trust between police and the communities they serve - because we are stronger together," Ferguson added. "Hillary and her team have engaged law enforcement throughout the campaign to listen to ideas and solutions, and she will continue to do so as president." Leaders of the police union wouldn't give a straight answer when asked if they believed that Clinton respected law enforcement officers. Asked whether he thought Clinton respected the police, Canterbury said, "Can't answer that question. Don't know." Asked the same question, the police union's national executive director, Jim Pasco, said, "I don't know. She isn't talking to us." "You can quote me on that," he added. "Candidly, we were very disappointed," Pasco said of Clinton's decision not to fill out the questionnaire. "We are an organization that tries to be bipartisan and works with members of either party wherever we have common ground." "And the idea that a presidential candidate would not want to at least talk to an organization that represents almost half of the police officers in the United States and is a thought leader in the public sphere ... is very disappointing." On the eve of the Democratic convention, Canterbury wrote a note - widely shared on Facebook - criticizing the Democratic Party's attitude toward law enforcement, saying the party was focused more on the deaths caused by police officers than officers killed in the line of duty. The Democrats had several law enforcement officials speak at their convention. But they seemed to devote more attention to speeches from mothers who lost children in police altercations, labeling them the "Mothers of the Movement." Asked whether he thought policing was becoming a red versus blue issue, Pasco insisted he didn't view support for law enforcement in partisan terms. "There are many members of the Democratic Party, elected officials who are stalwart allies of law enforcement," he said.

Pasco singled out Vermon Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) and House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) for praise. Trump is working hard to win the police union's endorsement. On Friday, the GOP nominee led a 40-minute meeting with the union's presidential screening committee in a conference room at Trump Tower. Trump was alone at the table, and only accompanied in the room by one aide, Rick Gates, Pasco said. Trump and the union representatives discussed the presidential questionnaire and the GOP nominee asked about the recent uptick in violence against police officers. "Trump has got a long history of being friendly to law enforcement," Canterbury said. "He's continued that during his campaign. We've seen that at most of his campaign stops he takes time to speak to the officers that are protecting him ... very respectful, and that's being recognized by law enforcement officers." Canterbury and Pasco said Trump expressed concern about the number of police officers being killed by firearms in the line of duty. "He wanted to know from us did we feel that there was an uptick in assaults and we of course said yes," Canterbury said. Canterbury said he was encouraged that Trump pledged his support for "federal dollars for training, as long as it can stay within the budget." "He also was in full agreement on lifting the executive order on surplus military equipment." "I was encouraged by his support of law enforcement but I am banned by our regulations from having a personal opinion," Canterbury said. "I have one," he added, "but my membership believes that it's their decision to make."

TRUMP CONTINUES TO MUDDLE IMMIGRATION BAN MESSAGE.

After days of increasing criticism and mixed messaging over Donald Trump's plan to temporarily ban Muslims from coming to the United States, Trump further muddled his message at a speech here Tuesday, decrying the difficulties that Christian Syrians have in getting into the country, even though he has proposed banning all immigration from Syria.

And likely to further frustrate Republicans, more than 24 hours after a hotbed Supreme Court decision was handed down regarding abortions clinics in Texas, Trump surprisingly refrained from weighing in. Trump also didn't make any mention of the findings concerning presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the House Select Committee's report on Benghazi.

Instead, Trump reached deep into his primary campaign's greatest hits catalog, going on a lengthy bit about his support for waterboarding.

"[T]hey can do chopping off heads, drowning people in steel cages - they can do whatever they want to do," Trump said. "And you know, they eat dinner like us. Can you imagine them sitting around the table or wherever they're eating their dinner, talking about the Americans don't do waterboarding and yet we chop off heads. They probably think we're weak. We're stupid. We don't know what we're doing. We have no leadership. You know, you have to fight fire with fire."

And once again, Trump delivered a contradictory message on one of the staples of his campaign platform: the temporary ban on refugees and Muslims.

"If you were a Christian from Syria, it was one of the hardest places in the world to come into the United States," Trump said. "It was one of the hardest things you could do was to get into the United States. If you were a Muslim from Syria, it was one of the easier places to come into the United States from. And I'm not saying one or the other. I'm saying how unfair is that. How bad is that?"

Trump has said that the United States should not accept any refugees from Syria. In a speech in New Hampshire recently, Trump said that immigration would be banned from countries linked to terrorism. The campaign has made no attempt to clarify what countries that would include or whether this would include non-Muslims.

On Monday, Trump tweeted, "We must suspend immigration from regions linked with terrorism until a proven vetting method is in place." His spokesperson, Katrina Pierson, told CNN that there was to be no change to the initial Muslim ban. Trump called NBC News to say Christians from Syria would be "vetted very, very seriously," without clarifying whether they would be allowed into the United States or not.

Whalid Phares, a top foreign policy advisor to Trump, told The Hill in an email that he would be scaling back the policy.

"[I]t is natural that the principle of a general ban will evolve into narrower policy suggestions during the campaign, and eventually when Mr. Trump is elected, he would direct the agencies and work with Congress to develop precise policies to detect the actual Jihadists," Phares wrote to The Hill. "His statements were not against any community but warnings that the terrorists are penetrating every group they can."

But Hope Hicks, Trump's director of communications, in a statement to CBS News over the weekend, said Trump's policy had not changed since his speech in New Hampshire, which did not suggest any sort of scaling back of the ban.

Trump has run a more traditional and professional presidential campaign operation recently. He has expanded his campaign staff. He is making more use of opposition researchers. There are more press releases going out to reporters. However, it hasn't helped with his general election messaging.

Trump gave a speech earlier in the day, in Pennsylvania, touting his policies on trade - that he would label China a currency manipulator, that he would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement. It was the side of Trump that the Republican establishment has been able to get behind - a tough stance on China with a pro-worker tinge.

However, in Ohio, Trump seemed to let his impulses for colorful rhetoric get the better of him, referring to the Trans-Pacific Partnership as a "rape" of the United States.

"So, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is another disaster," Trump said. "Done and pushed by special interests who want to rape our country, just a continuing rape of our country. That's what it is too. It's a harsh word. It's a rape of our country."

It wasn't the first time Trump had used "rape" in a political context. In early May, Trump accused of China of "raping" the United States at a rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

Many in the Republican Party, the very one Trump is struggling to unify behind him, support free trade and the TPP. For example, House Speaker Paul Ryan, someone who Trump has already had a tense relationship with, has vigorously touted free trade policies.

THE 5 MOST SERIOUS ACCUSATIONS FROM REPUBLICANS’ BENGHAZI REPORT.

Remember that heated hearing last fall where Hillary Clinton sat in front of Congress for 11 hours and defended her handling of the Benghazi terrorist attacks? Well, a report from that investigation (of which Clinton's testimony was just one part) is out, capping the two-year process that is the ninth overall investigation into Benghazi.

There is no smoking gun, but the report does conclude that Clinton and the Obama administration more broadly should have realized how in-danger our diplomatic posts in Libya were at the time of the 2012 attack and done more to protect them and the four Americans -- including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens -- who were killed.

Or, more accurately, the Republicans on the special Benghazi committee concluded that. Democrats on the committee called this whole thing a partisan witch hunt to bring down Clinton's presidential run and released their own, much softer report on Monday. But those two reports aren't even the sum total of the committee's work; two of the committee's most conservative lawmakers released a more critical report, which was not signed off on by the rest of the GOP members.

For our purposes, we're going to focus exclusively on Republicans' main report -- I know, it gets confusing -- since Republicans are the ones in control of the committee and Congress, and this is the report a majority of the committee members signed off on. It's also the one that will be at-issue in the 2016 presidential race.

Clinton has rebutted many of the report's key findings in the past, though this one brings several new details about that night that committee Chair Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) says should "fundamentally change the way you view Benghazi."

Here are the five most serious findings from it, according to reviews of the report from The Washington Post's Karen Young and Adam Goldman, Politico's Racheel Bade, CNN's Stephen Collinson and a news conference Gowdy gave Tuesday about it:

1. The State Department failed to protect our diplomats in Libya

This is the report's bottom line. It doesn't necessarily lay the blame at Clinton's feet -- Gowdy had said he wanted to keep the report focused on the facts, not personalities -- but the conclusion is clear: Clinton and the Obama administration should have realized the risks.

To back this conclusion up, CNN's Collinson reports that requests for more security in Benghazi leading up to the attack went unheard or were refused. (In a statement to reporters, State Department spokesperson Mark Toner indicated there was no new evidence in the report.)

2. The CIA missed warning signs

The report says the agency misread how dangerous Libya, in the midst of a revolution after overthrowing its longtime dictator a year earlier, was at the time. Recall the attack took place on Sept. 11, 2012.

3. The Defense Department failed to rescue Americans in time

Or at least, they were late in deploying help, waiting until well after the attack had begun even though President Obama had approved the military to do whatever it needed to hours earlier. U.S. military forces didn't reach Benghazi until the day after the attack. The report blames a breakdown in the chain of command for this.

"No U.S. military asset was every deployed to Benghazi despite the order of the Secretary of Defense at 7 o'clock that night," Gowdy told reporters in a press conference Tuesday. "So Washington had access to real-time access information yet somehow they thought he fighting had subsided."

(The Democrats' version of the report concludes that even if the military got to Benghazi earlier, it could not have saved the lives of the four Americans who were killed. Gowdy says that's beside the point.)

4. The Obama administration "stonewalled" the investigation

The administration engaged in what Gowdy described as "intentional," "coordinated" and "shameful" stonewalling of his investigation by refusing to turn over all of its records and delaying getting others to Congress.

5. A Clinton aide influenced the State Department's review

As noted above, Congress isn't the only branch of government that reviewed what happened in Benghazi. The State Department did its own, too, which was intended to be internal but independent (think the watchdog report on Clinton's emails).

But according to a section of the Benghazi investigation that Bade obtained, the report "was consistently influenced by" Cheryl Mills, Clinton's former chief of staff. Mills has said she offered suggestions on drafts, but they were merely that, suggestions.

What the report didn't answer

Among the most prominent areas the report doesn't shed light on are allegations that the United States was helping get weapons to Libyan rebels. Any such operation, which Politico's Bade reports Clinton herself supported but the administration never confirmed or denied, would have been top-level secret. (Recall the 2012 attack happened a year after a successful uprising against its longtime dictator, Moammar Gaddafi.)

Apparently the government still refuses to answer questions about whether it existed; the report says they refused to let anyone who might have knowledge of such a program testify.

CLINTON CAMPAIGN: BREXIT DRAMA BUILDS CASE AGAINST TRUMP.

Hillary Clinton's campaign is seizing on the turmoil emanating from Europe to make their case that Donald Trump would be a disaster as president.

With the European Union reeling following the stunning vote to leave the governing union, top Clinton aides said Trump's comments while in Europe should give voters in the U.S. pause.

"Donald Trump actively rooted for this outcome, and he's rooting for the economic turmoil in its wake," said Jake Sullivan, the campaign's senior policy adviser. "Every time there's a significant global event, Donald Trump proves again that he's temperamentally unfit for the job."

At the same time, Clinton's camp was quick to push back against notions that the results in Britain should serve as any predictor for what awaits the U.S. when its own voters head to the polls in November.

Some analysts had noted that many of the same motivations behind the campaign to leave the EU are at work in Trump's campaign, including populist anger and frustration with politicians in power. The thinking goes that if those motivations won out in Britain, the same could happen in America.

But Sullivan described the Brexit vote as "profoundly different from a vote for who should be commander in chief."

"It's important that we recognize that this American election is about what is happening here in America, not what's happening in Yorkshire or in Cardiff," he added.

Sullivan argued that Trump's response to the global political shakeup proved he "doesn't have a clue."

While in Scotland to reopen a golf course Friday, Trump praised British voters for narrowly deciding to leave the EU.

"They took back control of their country. It's a great thing," he told reporters.

When asked about the impact of the sharp fall in the value of the British pound, Trump argued it would be a boon for his business there.

"Look, if the pound goes down, they're going to do more business. When the pound goes down, more people are coming to Turnberry," he said, referring to his Scotland golf course.

Meanwhile, investors worldwide are reeling from the result, which was not anticipated by financial markets. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down over 500 points in midday trading, making it one of the worst trading days of the year. Before Thursday's vote, Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen warned Congress a British exit could come with "significant economic repercussions."

"He actually put his golf business ahead of the interests of working families in the United States," said Sullivan.

In a separate statement released earlier in the day, Clinton said she respected the choice made by British voters but that the accompanying uncertainty underlined the need for "calm, steady, experienced leadership in the White House."

OUSTED CAMPAIGN MANAGER HAD UNLIKELY PATH TO TRUMP TOWER.

NEW YORK — Corey Lewandowski, dismissed Monday as Donald Trump's campaign manager, had risen from political obscurity to oversee the celebrity businessman's rise to the brink of the Republican nomination, but he also became a flashpoint for campaign in-fighting.

Lewandowski was a little-known New Hampshire operative when Trump hired him at first sight early last year to run his as yet-unannounced campaign. Lewandowski, a close-cropped, sharp-elbowed figure, was the most fervid believer in the strategy to "Let Trump be Trump," unleashing the businessman to upend the Republican primaries by using his larger-than-life personality to summon raucous rallies and dominate media attention.

But Lewandowski generated the wrong kind of headlines in March when he was charged with misdemeanor battery for an altercation involving a female reporter after a news conference in Florida. The charges were later dropped.

Soon after that, Trump brought in Paul Manafort, a veteran Republican national operative, and relations between his more seasoned group and the rag-tag original campaign staff grew toxic, with both camps sniping at each other in closed-door meetings and in the press.

Lewandowski's dismissal comes less than a month until what would have been his greatest political triumph: Trump's acceptance of the Republican presidential nominee at the party's national convention in Cleveland.

"A lot of us have been here from the very beginning when the professional pundits said this was a career-ender and we weren't going anywhere," he said in May. "We've done something no one thought could be done."

Reached Monday, he said only that Manafort "has been in operational control of the campaign since April 7." He declined to elaborate on his dismissal.

Lewandowski's path to Trump Tower was an unlikely one. He grew up in the working-class former mill town of Lowell, Massachusetts, worked as an operative on Capitol Hill, graduated from the New Hampshire state police academy and took a job with Americans for Prosperity, the flagship conservative political organization of the billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch.

He had no national campaign experience when he took the helm of the Trump campaign, a longshot bid dismissed by many as a celebrity's vanity project. But the campaign soon surged, as Lewandowski and the candidate maintained focus on media and the rallies, keeping the staff lean and eschewing traditional campaign hallmarks like costly voter data efforts and advertising buys.

He accompanied Trump on the road, acting as much as a body man as campaign manager, and was seen as a gatekeeper for the candidate. Trump often spoke warmly of the campaign manager and steadfastly defended him after the arrest.

"I can't destroy a man," Trump said. "I can't destroy him. He's got a beautiful wife and children, and I'm not gonna destroy a man for that."

Lewandowski's plan to model the broader general election fight after the shoestring primary campaign drew skepticism from many Republicans. The campaign has largely outsourced its ground game to the Republican National Committee and was slow to increase its fundraising efforts. Lewandowski was reluctant to expand the staff.

As the clashes with Manafort became more frequent, many of Trump's Republican allies and inner circle — including his adult children — believed a change in course was needed before a pitched national campaign against Hillary Clinton.

New Hampshire State Republican party officials say Lewandowski is still slated to serve as the state's delegation chair to the Cleveland convention.

Obama Makes Phone Call To Jo Cox's Husband.

June 18,2016 :By Edwin84.

Jo Cox, who had worked on Mr Obama's 2008 election campaign, is praised by the President for her "selfless service".

Barack Obama has called the husband of Jo Cox to offer condolences on behalf of the American people, the White House has said.

The President, who is on a tour of several US national parks with his family, spoke on the phone with Brendan Cox while he was travelling on Air Force One.

Mrs Cox had worked on Mr Obama's 2008 presidential election campaign before she became MP for Batley and Spen.

The White House said in a statement: "President Obama offered his sincere condolences on behalf of the American people to Mr Cox and his two young children, as well as to her friends, colleagues and constituents.

"The President noted that the world is a better place because of her selfless service to others, and that there can be no justification for this heinous crime, which robbed a family, a community, and a nation of a dedicated wife, mother, and public servant."

Mrs Cox was shot and stabbed in the street outside her constituency surgery in Birstall, near Leeds in West Yorkshire, on Thursday.

On Friday, Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said she was "horrified by the assassination" of the Labour MP and called her a "rising star".

"It is cruel and terrible that her life was cut short by a violent act of political intolerance," she said.

This is how we must honour Jo Cox - by rejecting bigotry in all its forms, and instead embracing, as she always did, everything that binds us together.