Archive

2024

Browsing

As the cost of living continues to be a crucial concern for voters, there’s an urgent need for candidates to present viable solutions for making health care both affordable and accessible. Here are five fresh principles for health care reform that can resonate across party lines. 

One of the biggest reasons major Washington-led health care reforms have failed to lower health care costs is because they focus on health insurance instead of health care, and very little on health itself. 

ObamaCare and the Inflation Reduction Act are perfect examples. Every year, these programs give more money to health insurance companies to offset the costs of higher premiums for people with larger incomes. A better approach is to fund American patients, not health insurance companies, by giving them direct control over the subsidy they qualify for and let them use it to buy the care and coverage that works best for them.

To further stop this doom loop, lawmakers must shift their focus from merely subsidizing insurance premiums to addressing the underlying issues of high health care prices and excessive demand. Lower prices and lower demand will lead to lower premiums.

.The challenge for Washington in focusing on health and health care is that they are both local issues, not national. Health care is delivered in a local setting, and the quality of care you receive is largely linked to what is available locally. Meanwhile, population health is much more influenced by local conditions than national ones. 

This means a command-and-control approach from Washington to improve the health of our people and the quality of care they receive is doomed to fail. Instead, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should leverage its position to be a facilitator of change at the local level rather than an imposer of change. 

One example of how this could be done is block grants and waivers in Medicaid, which would empower states and local communities to best cover and improve the health of vulnerable populations. 

The current health insurance, big government-dominated system is your old cable bundle. The health care system of the future is streaming on demand. We need reforms to move us toward on demand, and that means enabling patients to cut out the middleman. 

Direct care clinics allow patients to cut out the insurance middleman and pay doctors a monthly fee that gives them on demand access to their services. This arrangement is better for patients and doctors. By eliminating insurance company paperwork and getting doctors off the revenue cycle roller coaster, doctors can have smaller patient panels and spend more time with patients. 

Washington can support the growth of direct care by allowing Direct Primary Care memberships to be paid for with Health Savings Accounts funds. We should also make them available to Medicaid, Medicare and ObamaCare patients using their benefit dollars. 

We are conservatives committed to free market principles, but we also recognize that a successful market for health care needs very strong rules in place to protect patients. 

This is because health care is not your prototypical, Adam Smith-style marketplace. The asymmetry of information between patients and doctors is enormous, and the presence of the third-party payer means patients have no concept of the value of the care they receive.

Transparency can help even the playing field, bringing much needed accountability to the health care system. This means strengthening price and quality transparency for providers, so patients and self-insuring companies can find the best value for their health care dollars. 

It also means transparency into the business practices of the health care middlemen like managed care companies, wholesalers and pharmacy benefit managers. For instance, self-insured companies must have the right to see their claims data so they can audit their expenses. Drug manufacturer rebates to pharmacy benefit managers must be exposed and the savings should be passed on to patients at the pharmacy counter. 

We also need visibility into provider network contracts to see if hospitals are leveraging their size or position to force coverage of low value procedures (such as in-hospital imaging) and shut out competition. 

. Finally, candidates must remember that as much as voters are demanding solutions to make health care more affordable, these solutions cannot come at the expense of patients getting the care they need. Americans view health care primarily as a moral issue, and an economic one second. Rationing from the government or private sector is not an acceptable solution. 

By treating the underlying issues of high costs and inefficiencies, localizing health care solutions, eliminating the middleman when possible, demanding transparency, and recognizing health care as a moral imperative, we can create a system that truly serves the needs of all Americans. 

This is an approach to health care reform that could transcend party lines and genuinely serve the American people. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former President Trump’s leadership PAC spent another $2.9 million on legal bills last month, according to a campaign finance filing Tuesday. 

The leadership PAC, Save America, spent about $50 on Trump’s legal expenses last year, Politico reported. Save America received another $5 million from the pro-Trump super PAC MAGA Inc., according to Tuesday’s filing with the Federal Elections Committee (FEC). 

The money went to covering Save America’s $2.9 million in legal spending in January – less than the leadership PAC has spent on legal bills in recent months, though the amount still accounted for most of Save America’s spending. At the end of January, Save America said it had $6.3 million left in the bank. 

MAGA Inc. sent $42 million to Save America last year to help cover legal expenses. 

Trump’s web of political committees spent more than they raised collectively last year, according to Politico. 

Over the last two years, Trump’s Save America political action committee, his presidential campaign and his other fundraising organizations have devoted $76.7 million to legal fees, according to the Associated Press, and campaign finance experts expect the current GOP front-runner to spend PAC money to defray the cost of his judgments in some way. 

After spending more money on ads and legal expenses than it received from donors, Trump’s campaign cash holdings dropped to just over $30 million at the end of January – down from about $33 million in December, the campaign’s FEC filing shows, according to Reuters. But last month, he did successfully sweep GOP primary contests in Iowa and New Hampshire. 

The Trump campaign said it spent more than $11 million and raised more than $8 million in January. As the Democratic incumbent faces a less competitive primary contest, the Biden campaign reported in its FEC disclosure that it ended January with about $56 million in cash – an increase from the $46 million in December. 

Trump’s legal expenses might now exceed half a billion dollars, according to the AP. 

New York Judge Arthur Engoron ordered Trump and his companies Friday to pay $355 million in fines, plus interest, after ruling that he had manipulated his net worth in financial statements in a case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. 

The stiff penalty comes just weeks after Trump was ordered to pay $83.3 million to the columnist E. Jean Carroll for damaging her reputation after she accused him of sexual assault and defamation. A separate jury last year awarded Carroll $5 million from Trump for sexual abuse and defamation.

Trump has adamantly denied wrongdoing and pledged to appeal, a process that could take months or even years.

Between Friday’s ruling and the two judgments in Carroll’s case, Trump would be on the hook for about $542 million in legal judgments.

Trump owes another $110,000 for refusing to comply with a subpoena in the civil fraud case and $15,000 for repeatedly disparaging the judge’s law clerk in violation of a gag order. As part of Friday’s ruling, the judge also ordered both of Trump’s adult sons to pay $4 million apiece.

Trump’s court-ordered debts don’t end there. Last month, he was ordered to pay nearly $400,000 in legal fees to The New York Times after suing the newspaper unsuccessfully. He is currently appealing a judgment of $938,000 against him and his attorney for filing what a judge described as a ‘frivolous’ lawsuit against Hillary Clinton.

Though it is not uncommon for the size of judgments, particularly high-dollar amounts, to be reduced on appeal, Trump has already deposited $5 million owed to Carroll for the first defamation case into a court-controlled account, along with an additional $500,000 in interest required by New York law. Carroll will not have access to the funds until the appeals process plays out.

Trump may soon be forced to do the same for the $83.3 million judgment in the second Carroll case. Alternatively, he could secure a bond and pay only a portion up front — though that option would come with interest and fees and likely require some form of collateral. Trump would have to find a financial institution willing to front him the money.

In the civil fraud case, it will be up to the courts to decide how much Trump must put up as he mounts his appeal. He may be required to pay the full sum immediately after the appellate court rules, which could come as soon as this summer, University of Michigan law professor Will Thomas told the AP. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Iranian officials accused Israel on Wednesday of carrying out a sabotage operation that blew up a natural gas pipeline last week.

Iranian Oil Minister Javad Owji provided no evidence for his claim, but told Iranian state news that the attack was the latest in a series of Israeli efforts to destabilize Iranian infrastructure.

‘The explosion of the gas pipeline was an Israeli plot,’ Owji said. ‘The enemy intended to disturb gas service in the provinces and put people’s gas distribution at risk.’

‘The evil action and plot by the enemy was properly managed,’ he added.

Israel has not commented on the Iranian gas pipeline explosions.

The blasts on Feb. 14 hit a natural gas pipeline running from Iran’s western Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province up north to cities on the Caspian Sea. The roughly 1,270-kilometer (790-mile) pipeline begins in Asaluyeh, a hub for Iran’s offshore South Pars gas field.

Owji has also compared the attack to a series of mysterious and unclaimed assaults on gas pipelines in 2011 — including around the anniversary of Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.

‘The goal that the enemies were pursuing were to cut the gas in the major provinces of the country and it did not happen,’ Owji said last week. ‘Except for the number of villages that were near the gas transmission lines, no province suffered a cut.’

Meanwhile, Israel has carried out attacks in Iran that have predominantly targeted its nuclear program. The head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog warned earlier this month that Iran is ‘not entirely transparent’ regarding its atomic program, particularly after an official who once led Tehran’s program announced the Islamic Republic has all the pieces for a weapon ‘in our hands.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

I begin each year by reviewing the long-term technical positions and behaviors of the “Big Four” — 10-year yields, S&P 500 ($SPX), Commodities, and the US Dollar. I believe that interest rates, particularly in a credit-dependent/leveraged system, generally drive economic and market cycles. And, since by profession I am a rates/credit portfolio manager, strategist, and trader, I always begin there.

Granted, a macro view doesn’t often inform short-term trading, but anything that helps me understand the ebb and flow and interconnectedness of markets is helpful. More importantly, recognizing markets aligned for significant macro change can be invaluable, particularly in terms of risk management.

Since most good technical analysis is fractal, the same techniques used to describe the macro ebb and flow can often translate to shorter time frames. For the first two decades of my trading career, I kept a manual grid of the Big 4 plus a few other markets (gold, oil, 2-year Treasury, and so forth) that I updated hourly with price and the change from the prior hour. Doing so taught me a great deal about market interactions and interrelationships.

Monthly 10-Year Note Yield

CHART 1. MONTHLY CHART OF 10-YEAR TREASURY YIELDS Over the last four decades, bond yields had consistently and reliably made lower highs and lower lows. The entire bull market was defined by a broad declining channel (A–B, C–D). The A–B downtrend line represented the “stride of demand,” or the zone where buyers consistently emerged, and the C–D line represented the “overbought line,” or the zone where supply or sellers consistently emerged.

Take Note. Falling bond yields are synonymous with higher bond prices. In other words, a downtrend in yield = a bull market in bonds.

  From 2012 forward, there were growing signs that the long downtrend was aging. Four things stood out.

The repeated failure to push to the oversold line (C–D). The flattening out of the decline, where each push to a new yield low only covered around 100 bps. The 2018 spike to 3.24% that weakened the primary A-B downtrend.The bond push to the area around the center of the channel, and failure to push beyond the midline, much less into the overbought line (C–D), in March 2020. This change of behavior strongly suggested that demand was tiring. Multiple visible changes in behavior strongly suggested that the 40-year downtrend was in danger of terminating.

The clear break and acceleration above the A–B downtrend have moved the long trend from bullish to neutral. While it’s likely that the move above the November 2018 pivot at 3.24%, coupled with the prior behavior changes, mark the beginning of a long-term bear market, a higher low (perhaps forming in 2024) is needed to complete/confirm that change.

Note the additional changes in behavior. The 459 bps move from 0.39% to 4.98% represents the single largest bearish move since the inception of the bull market in September 1981, and the MACD oscillator level far exceeded the levels that marked yield highs throughout the entire bull market.

10-Year Yield Monthly With MACD

After producing the most overbought reading since the 1980s, the oscillator is trying to roll over and is displaying a small negative divergence (suggesting lower yields and higher price). While not a definitive roll, it suggests that there is some potential for a meaningful turn.

CHART 2. MONTHLY CHART OF 10-YEAR NOTE YIELD.

10-Year Yield Weekly

With this next chart, I will work with the weekly perspective, five and ten-year charts, and yield curves.

CHART 3. WEEKLY CHART OF 10-YEAR YIELD.

 The following are several key fundamental points around rates:

The defining macro characteristic of the 40-year bull market has been the continual fall in the inflation rate. If that is changing (I believe it has), the secular bond trend is likely also to change.If the trend in inflation changes, the negative correlation between bonds and equity that drives 60/40 allocation and risk parity investing is likely to flip and become positive. In other words, bonds and equity would, outside of periods of panic or economic distress, rise and fall together, destroying the diversification benefit. This has been the historical norm, and I expect the market to move in that direction gradually.The caveat: Quantitative easing removed the value proposition from bonds; when equities began to decline in 2022, bonds couldn’t provide a safe haven. They were already far too expensive, particularly in the context of a Federal Reserve aggressively tightening monetary policy. That is no longer the case. Bonds, while still expensive, can again provide a tactical hedge should risk assets or the economy weaken dramatically.At first glance, this seems at odds with the change in correlation discussed above, but it is a difference between the secular tide versus the intermediate wave.Most substantive bond rallies result from a crisis that creates a flight-to-quality. In an overly financialized and levered economy, rising rates often break the weakest link in the economic chain, creating a new crisis and a subsequent flight-to-quality rally. While there is little evidence of a systemic crisis, the lagged effect of the rapid increase in rates in an overly financialized system must be top of mind.

The Bottom Line

While there is still more work to be done to confirm the trend change, I believe the bond trend is finally changing, as the world moves from the deflationary backdrop of the last several decades to an inflationary backdrop. I will be a much better seller of rallies and bearish technical setups in the weekly/intermediate perspective.

Disclaimer: Shared content and posted charts are intended to be used for informational and educational purposes only. The CMT Association does not offer, and this information shall not be understood or construed as, financial advice or investment recommendations. The information provided is not a substitute for advice from an investment professional. The CMT Association does not accept liability for any financial loss or damage our audience may incur.

On this week’s edition of StockCharts TV‘s Halftime, Pete takes a look at long-term trends. Semiconductors taking it on the chin. Inflation is still a problem. Bonds are selling off, and the Fed isn’t cutting rates until, in Pete’s opinion, the unemployment rate falls.

Pete then comments on names like PANW and NVDA. The former sold off big time with lower guidance, while the latter is set to deliver an important EPS report tonight after the close. Like Pete’s said on many occasions, you can’t win if you get into the ring with the invisible man. And EPS reports can blindside you, like it did on PANW.

This video originally premiered on February 21, 2024. You can watch on our dedicated Halftime by Chaikin Analytics page on StockCharts TV.

You can view all previously recorded episodes of Halftime by Chaikin Analytics with Pete Carmasino at this link.

Capital One’s $35.3 billion deal to buy Discover is a long way from being completed.

But consumer advocates and some lawmakers are already raising questions about how the proposed merger could affect credit-card users — many of whom are already under pressure from high interest rates and record debts.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., a longtime proponent of tighter financial regulation, called for federal officials to block the deal.

“The merger of @CapitalOne and @Discover threatens our financial stability, reduces competition, and would increase fees and credit costs for American families,” Warren, who is also the chair of the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Economic Policy, posted on X. 

Industry groups and experts warned against a shrinking credit card market dominated by a handful of large players, which they said are more likely to squeeze customers.

“We should be worried about the functionality of the credit card market in general. This merger probably heightens that,” said Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, a national network of consumer advocacy groups.

While analysts generally say the merger stands a decent shot at securing regulatory approval, “it would face gale-force headwinds from a Washington that is deeply skeptical of consolidation [and] anxious regarding consumer-facing issues in an election year,” Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at BTIG, a global financial services firm, said in a statement.

But blocking the tie-up could be seen as helping Visa and Mastercard, the credit card giants some policymakers have criticized as a duopoly in need of a shakeup from more serious rivals.

Both Visa and Mastercard grew their revenues by 11% and 12.5%, respectively, between late 2022 and the end of last year thanks to strong consumer spending. The four biggest card brands — Visa, Mastercard, American Express and Discover — saw more than $10 trillion in purchases in 2023, up 6.4% from the year before, according to the Nilson Report.

The top 30 credit card companies comprise about 95% of Americans’ credit card debt, BTIG estimates, which could fuel pushback over competition concerns.

Rust nodded to a report last week from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which found that the 25 largest credit card issuers already charge customers interest rates eight to 10 points higher than small- and medium-sized banks and credit unions.

“All those reasons point to some kind of imbalance, and it’s favoring large credit issuers,” said Rust. “It has to do with their marketing budgets, their ability to get their brands in front of consumers on television or send out mailers.”

If it goes through, the deal could further whittle down customers’ options to shop around for the best credit card, Rust and others warned.

“Consumers would always rather have more options, because more competition is generally better,” said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree. But “if Capital One sees that there’s a bunch of overlap between what they have and what Discover brings to the table, and they want to combine the two instead of keeping them as separate brands, you could end up seeing some of those offers get reduced,” he said.

The average credit card interest rate in the U.S. is 24.61%, according to LendingTree, the highest since the credit marketplace began tracking monthly rates in 2019. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York said earlier this month that credit card debts entering “serious delinquency” jumped from 4% to over 6% from the last quarter of 2022 to the same period last year, at a time when total consumer debt has hit a whopping $17.5 trillion.

The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, an advocacy group that looks to funnel private investment into underserved communities, also wasted no time criticizing the merger.

“It is very difficult to imagine how federal regulators could allow Capital One to buy Discover given the requirement that mergers benefit the public as well as insiders,” CEO Jess Van Tol said in a statement Tuesday. “The deal also poses massive antitrust concerns, given the vertical integration of Capital One’s credit card lending with Discover’s credit card network.”

Representatives for Capital One and Discover didn’t respond to requests for comment. The credit card industry has pushed back on accusations that it isn’t sufficiently competitive. A banking industry group said last week in response to the CFPB’s report that borrowers have plenty of card terms, perks and features to choose from.

Experts expect it would take at least a year for a merger to be completed, and potentially longer for the full consumer impact to come into view.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a financial industry watchdog, moved last month to enhance its review of proposed combinations. That could throw up more hurdles for Capital One and Discover, Rust said, potentially by involving more entities in the review process, such as local community groups in various cities where the companies operate.

The Biden administration has tightened its scrutiny of big mergers and acquisitions, but last spring’s collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic Bank put extra attention on the banking sector. The Department of Justice has said it’s focused on guarding against “excessive market power” as it reviews deals alongside bank regulators.

If the Capital One-Discover deal isn’t blocked, some credit card rates may well be lower by the time it’s completed, with the Federal Reserve expected to begin cutting interest rates later this year. But borrowers shouldn’t wait to pay down any existing high-interest debt, said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate. “It’s going to stay high-cost credit card debt, regardless of who acquires whom,” he said.

There could be a silver lining for customers of both companies should the merger go through: rewards.

Card issuers like Capital One have claimed the proposed Credit Card Competition Act — which would require them to allow merchants to use at least two card networks to process card transactions — would drive up their costs so much they’d have to curtail credit card rewards programs.

Acquiring Discover would give Capital One “an opportunity for more revenue and exposure,” LendingTree’s Schulz said, which could offset potential cost increases and help fund generous rewards.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

If you’re checking a bag for an American Airlines flight, expect to pay more.

The carrier has announced it is raising its checked bag fee by $10, from $30 to $40, for bags checked at the airport. For luggage checked online through American’s website, the fee is increasing from $30 to $35.

For a second checked bag, the fee is rising from $40 to $45, whether purchased online or at the airport.

By comparison, a passenger’s first checked bag on Delta and United still costs $30, while second ones cost $40 to $50.

It’s the first time since 2018 that American has increased its checked bag fee.

The changes, and others, were announced Tuesday as part of an effort to nudge passengers to become American Airlines AAdvantage status members. Customers who sign up will continue to receive complimentary bags on American Airlines flights, the carrier said. And most customers who have an AAdvantage credit card will get their first eligible checked bag free on domestic American Airlines itineraries. Customers who buy a ticket for a premium cabin on a domestic or international flight can still check their bags for free.

“Not only does booking directly with American provide the best possible experience, it’s also where we offer the best fares and it’s most rewarding for our AAdvantage members,” Vasu Raja, American’s chief commercial officer, said in a statement.

A full list of new changes for AAdvantage members can be found here.

American is also changing its fee structure for checked items that are overweight.

For bags that exceed the 50-pound limit by just 3 pounds, the fee will be $30, down from $100. The same fee will apply to items 3 inches larger than the 62-inch limit.

For items that are both oversized and overweight up to 70 pounds, the fee will be capped at $200. Fees for items that are up to 100 pounds will be capped at $450.

Last month, American posted a $19 million profit for the last three months of 2023, topping Wall Street estimates.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

The State Department announced Tuesday that the U.S. will be unveiling a ‘major sanctions package’ against Russia later this week to hold them ‘accountable’ for the death of jailed Putin critic Alexei Navalny. 

The latest wave of sanctions to target the Russian government will be revealed on Friday, one day before the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

‘As the White House announced this morning at President Biden’s direction, we will be announcing a major sanctions package on Friday to hold Russia accountable for Navalny’s death in prison and for its actions over the course of the vicious and brutal war they have waged in Ukraine for the past two years,’ State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters at a briefing Tuesday. 

‘The Kremlin has poisoned Navalny, imprisoned him unjustly, kept him in harsh conditions and denied him medical care,’ Miller continued. 

‘It is the Russian government that is responsible for Navalny’s death while in detention and now in any other society, in a free democratic society, we would see openness and transparency as his family seeks more information about their beloved son, husband and father,’ he added. ‘But of course, in Russia, openness and transparency remain in short supply.’ 

Navalny died last Friday at the IK-3 penal colony in Kharp in northern Russia.  

The country’s prison agency said the 47-year-old opposition leader collapsed following a walk, but Navalny’s cause of death remains unknown, and his wife is accusing Putin of poisoning him. 

President Biden said Friday that there is ‘no doubt’ it was a ‘consequence of something that Putin and his thugs did.’ 

Russia though has brushed off the accusations from Biden and other Western officials, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying Monday, ‘We consider it absolutely unacceptable to make such, well, frankly obnoxious statements,’ according to Reuters. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The Trump presidential campaign issued a scathing response on Tuesday after his last remaining GOP challenger, former Ambassador Nikki Haley, announced she is not dropping out of the race to ‘kiss the ring’ despite facing a 30 point deficit in her home state of South Carolina.

‘She’s going to drop down to kiss a– when she quits, like she always does,’ Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, shortly after she announced she is staying in the race at least through Saturday’s South Carolina primary.

‘I feel no need to kiss the ring,’ Haley told a crowd in Greenville, South Carolina on Tuesday. ‘And I have no fear of Trump’s retribution. I’m not looking for anything from him. My own political future is of zero concern.’

‘I refuse to quit,’ Haley added. ‘South Carolina will vote on Saturday. But on Sunday, I’ll still be running for president. I’m not going anywhere.’

In her remarks, Haley outlined her belief that the calls for her to drop out are coming from ‘the political elite’ and ‘party bosses’ and that only three states have voted so far with many more to come in recent weeks.

‘I’m campaigning every day until the last person votes because I believe in a better America and a brighter future for our kids,’ Haley said. ‘Nothing good in life comes easy. I’m willing to take the cuts, the bruises and the name calling because the only way you get to the blessing is by going through the pain.’

‘The presidential primaries have barely begun. Just three states have voted. That’s right. Three. That’s it. After this weekend, we’ll be four. That’s not a lot,’ Haley explained. ‘In the ten days after South Carolina, another 21 states and territories will vote, and they deserve a real choice, not a Soviet-style election when there’s only one candidate, and he gets 99% of the vote. We don’t anoint kings in this country. We have elections. And Donald Trump, of all people, should know. We don’t rig elections.’

Haley also said that part of her rationale for staying in the race is that ‘the majority of Americans’ have signaled they ‘dislike both candidates.’

‘We have plenty of time to hash this out,’ Haley said. ‘If the race ended today, we would have the longest general election in history. There are still eight and a half months before Election Day. How do we really want to spend every day from now until November? Watching America’s most two most disliked politicians duke it out? No sane person wants that.’

Nearly 800 delegates are up for grabs on Super Tuesday as 15 states hold Republican presidential contests on March 5, with over 150 at stake over the following two weeks, the Trump campaign predicted in a memo released Tuesday that the former president would secure the nomination on March 19, even under a ‘most-generous model’ for Haley.

The Trump memo predicted an ‘a– kicking in the making’ in South Carolina and said the ‘true ‘State’ of Nikki Haley’s campaign’ is ‘broken down, out of ideas, out of gas, and completely outperformed by every measure, by Donald Trump.’

In response to Cheung’s comment, Haley spokesperson Olivia Perez-Cubas wrote on X, ‘xoxo’ along with a kissing emoji to which Cheung responded, ‘All of our internship positions have been filled, but maybe you can apply for next term.’

‘What a move,’ Haley campaign manager Betsy Ankney wrote on X in response to Cheung’s comment. ‘@TheStevenCheung is the key to winning back suburban women! #AreYouTiredOfWinningYet.’

‘You should ask Susie Wiles what she thinks about her people harassing women online and at our events,’ Perez-Cubas said in a statement to Fox News Digital referring to an earlier altercation on the campaign trail.

Cheung told Fox News Digital in a statement Tuesday that ‘Nikki ‘Birdbrain’ Haley can’t name one state she can win’ and ‘she keeps getting crushed after every single contest.’

‘At this point, she’s Crooked Joe Biden’s biggest surrogate.’

Trump’s campaign memo and Haley’s speech came out hours before Trump returns to South Carolina on Tuesday to headline a Fox News town hall in Greenville hosted by Laura Ingraham. The pre-taped one-hour event, which will focus on both domestic issues and overseas conflicts, will air at 7 p.m. ET.

The Real Clear Politics average of polls heading into Saturday’s primary election in South Carolina shows Trump leading Haley by 25 points.

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

An attorney for Hunter Biden is disputing a picture included in a Special Counsel Filing last week, saying it is not cocaine, as was previously described, but sawdust. 

The picture in question was among multiple photographs the president’s son allegedly took of his drug abuse. The Justice Department included the photos in a court filing last week to prove Hunter Biden was addicted to drugs when he answered ‘No’ to drug use on a gun application, which is a violation of federal law. 

Hunter Biden’s lawyer said one of the photos was taken in the office of his then-psychiatrist, Dr. Keith Ablow. Ablow had received the picture, Biden’s lawyer said, from a ‘master carpenter’ who was a ‘coke addict.’ 

The message accompanying this photo, Biden’s lawyer said in the court filing, was meant to convey to the younger Biden that he too ‘could overcome any addiction.’ 

Biden’s lawyer called the prosecution ‘reckless’ for ‘making such a hyperbolic and sensational claim in a public filing,’ saying the move would surely ‘prejudice Mr. Biden in the public eye.’ 

‘Mistaking sawdust for cocaine sounds more like a storyline from one of the 1980s Police Academy comedies than what should be expected in a high-profile prosecution by the U.S. Department of Justice,’ Biden’s lawyer stated in the court filing. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Justice Department for comment. 

The president’s son pleaded not guilty to federal gun charges in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in October, which accused him of lying about using drugs in October 2018 on a gun purchase form.

He previously acknowledged that he struggled with a crack cocaine addiction during a period in 2018, but his attorneys said he did not break the law. Hunter Biden has since said he has stopped using drugs and has been working to turn his life around. 

Tuesday’s court filing comes after Special Counsel David Weiss charged an FBI informant with giving false information after he alleged that Joe Biden and his son were paid millions in exchange for their help firing the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings. 

Fox News’ David Spunt and Sarah Rumpf-Whitten contributed to this report. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS