When does “it’s over” mean it’s not over? When the market plunges 65 points, of course.
The 2% hiccup came when Fox’s Martha MacCallum asked Trump advisor Peter Navarro whether John Bolton’s claims that Trump delayed imposing sanctions on China over its policy of interning Uighur Muslims would jeopardize the China trade deal. Navarro, fresh off accusing China of deliberately seeding the virus in the US by sending “over hundreds of thousands of Chinese citizens here to spread [it] around…” didn’t equivocate.
“Do you think that the president — he obviously really wanted to hang on to this trade deal as much as possible and he wanted them [China] to make good on the promises because there had been progress made on that trade deal,” MacCallum told Navarro. “But given everything that’s happened … is that over?”
“It’s over,” Navarro responded.
ES quickly plunged below its SMA10 and 2.618 Fib, but was promptly rescued by a plunge in VIX and spikes in CL and USDJPY which, not so coincidentally, popped back above its SMA10.
In all the turmoil over 9.2 million sickened and 475,000 killed by COVID-19, the ongoing social unrest, and an economy which is arguably teetering, it’s sometimes easy to forget the China trade deal and the months during which the market took its cues from the daily press briefings and chopper talk quips about how magnificently negotiations were going.
With the White House amping up its rhetoric over China’s culpability for the pandemic, I imagine Navarro’s initial assessment was the honest one.
continued for members…
Sorry, this content is for members only.
Already a member? Login below…