House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy appears on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss several ongoing political issues.

In the first two-thirds of the interview Leader McCarthy discusses Iran attacking the Saudi oil facility, and the ramifications therein. Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding back the USMCA hoping to get past the Canadian election; and the current field of 2020 democrat candidates. McCarthy holds the opinion that Elizabeth Warren will be the Democrat candidate for President.

In the last third of the interview (@11:15) McCarthy discusses the upcoming IG report on FISA abuse.  McCarthy believes: Andrew McCabe will be indicted; the IG report will identify culpability for James Comey, and the construct of a soft coup will be highlighted.

.

Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway appears on Fox News Sunday for an interview.  Bill Hemmer is filling in for Chris Wallace.  The recent Iranian attacks on Saudi Arabia oil production is the top issue covered.

Additionally, Ms. Conway discusses John Bolton’s replacement as National Security Adviser, current WH positions on legislation to restrict firearm ownership, the ongoing negotiations with China on trade, the impeachment nonsense and the democrat 2020 race.

This is funny in so many ways; especially for CTH readers who have a far better-than-ordinary understanding of the big picture Trump goals around China.

(1) CNBC tweeted this story last night (note the date/time). (2) It is written exclusively from the perspective of the Goldman Sachs analysts who represent the U.S. multinational position. (3) However, the article was actually written on May 12, 13, 2019.

What is funny about CNBC pushing this story, NOW, is how the claims within the CNBC story can be fact checked; and their predictions are, well, absurd (especially in hindsight).   Keep in mind this was written in May, and tweeted last night for some reason:

(Via CNBC) “Goldman Sachs said the cost of tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump last year against Chinese goods has fallen “entirely” on American businesses and households, with a greater impact on consumer prices than previously expected.

The bank said in a note that consumer prices are higher partly because Chinese exporters have not lowered their prices to better compete in the US market.” (link)

This Goldman Sach’s claim –made in May– can now be reviewed for accuracy by actual results on import pricing assembled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in September:

(BLS Link to Data)

As you can see, four months after the Goldman Sach’s claim, the results are entirely false.  The price of imported goods has decreased; additionally, China has further devalued their currency since May, creating an even a larger price offset.

Further in the Goldman Sach’s claims:

“Goldman also said the risk of a final round of tariffs on the roughly $300 billion of remaining imports from China has now risen to 30%.”

In their May 2019 analysis, Goldman put the odds of President Trump following through on more tariffs at 30 percent.   They really just don’t believe President Trump is committed to the China confrontation.  From their analytical perspective, no U.S. President would ever go into a full economic confrontation with China.  Remember, Goldman Sachs represents the majority opinion of the Wall Street ‘multinational’ community.

This analysis from Goldman Sachs underwrites the majority of their multinational investment planning and loans to multinational Wall Street corporations.  Laughably, we know the end result is that Trump did execute more Chinese tariffs and the Goldman Sachs analysis was/is 100 percent wrong.

And here’s the kicker:

“Our baseline expectation is that the U.S. and China will strike a deal later this year. We think this would come in the form of a gradual, staggered reduction in tariffs on a last-in, first-out schedule,” the bank said.

“There is, however, a risk of further escalation,” Goldman said. (link)

Again for emphasis, Goldman Sachs controls the investment direction for tens-of-billions for U.S. multinational corporations.   The quotes and opinions above represent their outlook, their actual belief, and what they were selling their clients in May 2019.

• They were wrong about price impacts.
• They were wrong about Trump following through on additional tariffs.
• And it’s almost certain they are wrong about a pending deal before the end of this year. (It’s now mid September).

What’s the takeaway?   Well first, Goldman Sachs controls hundreds-of-billions. Goldman is the predominant voice that all of the other Wall Street multinationals’ look toward.  Goldman is the incubator for almost all of the financial experts at the Fed. Goldman is also the baseline for all of the main Wall Street pundits….

Goldman is also 100% demonstrably wrong.

If you wonder why the Federal Reserve looks like they are running around with one foot nailed to the floorboard… well, look no further than Goldman Sach’s analysis.

Second, think about what will happen when these multinationals finally realize that President Trump is serious; and there will be no U.S-China trade deal that retains any semblance of the current trade relationship (if at all).

As soon as these Wall Street knuckleheads wake up to reality (likely dragging, kicking and screaming will be involved), they will have to shift their investment planning and strategic advice to those who want loans and investment. When that happens a much larger portion of the “multinational” money starts flowing back into the United States, and is no longer “multinational”.

It’s just too darn funny not to point out…..

From the first moment when he announced his intent to run for President of the United States in 2015, Donald Trump was very clear on one specific aspect to his view of why people would vote for him.  As a candidate, he repeated it often:

So the reporter said to me the other day, “But, Mr. Trump, you’re not a nice person. How can you get people to vote for you?”

I said, “I don’t know.” I said, “I think that number one, I am a nice person. I give a lot of money away to charities and other things. I think I’m actually a very nice person.”

But, I said, “This is going to be an election that’s based on competence, because people are tired of these nice people. And they’re tired of being ripped off by everybody in the world.”

President Donald J Trump continues to highlight that message today:

It’s funny, from time-to-time people ask “how is CTH consistently able to predict what Donald Trump will do about a complex issue”?  In reality the answer is simple, go back and re-read his hour long campaign kick-off speech. [See Here]

Donald Trump, now President Trump, is one of the most consistent people in history when it comes to his big picture views; and also his big picture solutions.  There are small shifts, and slight changes in the direction toward the solution, but ultimately the big picture destination is consistent.

Specifically because President Trump works on optimal solutions toward the goal destination, his objective, the non-politician takes a different approach than would be expected from a typical politician.  Ultimately this is how Trump is able to accomplish so much more in a similar amount of time; he’s not poll-testing the route.

Each big goal, each major objective, has a series of way-points.  The process for reaching those way-points is independent and entirely based on the goal itself.  Politicians look at this approach and think of it as inconsistent, because the travel is not subject to a specific map that is always followed.

Because President Trump’s search for ‘optimal travel’ is not based on a prior path – but based on each unique destination, the goal is more predictably reached.  In many ways it is just common sense.

Competence in policy is not measured by endless planning, discussion and debate… it is measured by results.  Achieving results requires action.  Start the journey and head to the way-point; reach the initial objective – evaluate, and immediately measure the next way-point; repeat until you reach the destination.

[…] So we need people— I’m a free trader. But the problem with free trade is you need really talented people to negotiate for you. If you don’t have talented people, if you don’t have great leadership, if you don’t have people that know business, not just a political hack that got the job because he made a contribution to a campaign, which is the way all jobs, just about, are gotten, free trade terrible.

Free trade can be wonderful if you have smart people, but we have people that are stupid. We have people that aren’t smart. And we have people that are controlled by special interests. And it’s just not going to work.

[…]  I love China. The biggest bank in the world is from China. You know where their United States headquarters is located? In this building, in Trump Tower. I love China. People say, “Oh, you don’t like China?”

No, I love them. But their leaders are much smarter than our leaders, and we can’t sustain ourself with that. There’s too much— it’s like— it’s like take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders.

They are ripping us. We are rebuilding China. We’re rebuilding many countries. China, you go there now, roads, bridges, schools, you never saw anything like it. They have bridges that make the George Washington Bridge look like small potatoes. And they’re all over the place.

We have all the cards, but we don’t know how to use them.

We don’t even know that we have the cards, because our leaders don’t understand the game.

We could turn off that spigot by charging them tax until they behave properly. (Cont…)