Trump to Push Tech Executives on Jobs - Wall Street Journal

Trump to Push Tech Executi ves on Jobs
During campaign and since his victory, the president-elect has emphasized the importance of boosting U.S. jobs
By ROLFE WINKLER
Updated Dec. 12, 2016 8:03 p.m. ET
President-elect Donald Trump is expected to press prominent technology executives to boost American employment when he meets them in New York this Wednesday, according to a person familiar with the meeting agenda.
Mr. Trump also plans to ask for recommendations on how tech companies can help the government run more efficiently, said this person, in what is expected to be a wide-ranging round-table discussion.
Invitations went out last week, but the agenda hasn’t been publicly disclosed. The meeting is scheduled to take place at 2 p.m. Eastern time at Trump Tower.
Executives from at least 10 companiesare expected to attend, including Apple Inc. Chief Executive Tim Cook,Amazon.com Inc. CEO Jeff Bezos,Alphabet Inc. chief Larry Page and Tesla Motors Inc. CEO Elon Musk.
During the election and since he won, Mr. Trump has emphasized the importance of boosting U.S. jobs. He has specifically targeted companies including Apple for purportedly sending jobs overseas. Apple, Amazon and Alphabet are among the most valuable companies in the U.S., yet they generally employ fewer people than big firms in other industries.
Wall Street Journal

Lesson for Trump in Hong Kong: try to bounce China at your peril CY Leung’s bitter experience illustrates diplomatic difficulties facing US president-elect - Financial Times

Hong Kong politics Add to myFT
Lesson for Trump in Hong Kong: try to bounce China at your peril
CY Leung’s bitter experience illustrates diplomatic difficulties facing US president-elect

YESTERDAY by: Tom Mitchell in Beijing
CY Leung’s decision not to seek a second term as Hong Kong’s chief executive is a disappointing denouement for a man who once seemed uniquely qualified to bridge the divide between his free, open city and China’s Communist rulers.
His failure to be that bridge also highlights an important lesson for Donald Trump as the US president-elect threatens to turn diplomatic precedent with Beijing upside down. Just nine days after accepting a congratulatory phone call from Taiwan’s president, Tsai Ying-wen, Mr Trump has publicly mulled whether he should be bound by the “One China” policy that has been a decades-long feature of the Sino-US relationship.
The lesson for Mr Trump is this: you try to push Beijing across its own “red lines” at your peril.
Years before he became chief executive in 2012, Mr Leung would tell international visitors that if they wanted to see the real Hong Kong, they needed to stray far beyond the territory’s globally famous business and tourist districts.
He advised them to ride a tram eastward along King’s Road to Shau Kei Wan. Only that way could they begin to understand the cramped conditions in which most people lived in what is ostensibly one of the world’s richest cities, at least as measured by per capita gross domestic product.
Mr Leung could rattle off the income disparity statistics that made a nonsense of Hong Kong’s impressive per capita GDP and was fully versed in the monopoly dynamics that belied perennial assertions that the territory was the world’s “freest economy”.
In addition to his understanding of the socio-economic divisions fuelling Hong Kong’s increasingly divisive and paralysed political scene, the chief executive-in-waiting was a long-time Beijing loyalist with unique insight into the inner workings of the Communist party.
According to people close to him, Mr Leung would in private conversations emphasise the Communist party’s preference for “zero risk” outcomes. Convincing Beijing to accept more risk than it was comfortable with was always his biggest challenge, especially in the context of Hong Kong’s political development.
Mr Leung and his two predecessors were selected by a 1,200-member “election committee” dominated by pro-Beijing figures. The Chinese government agreed to a plan for Hong Kong’s chief executive to be popularly elected in 2017, while insisting that the final candidates first be approved by the committee.
It was a remarkable gift from Mr Leung to Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp, which had long distrusted him because of his close ties to Beijing. Mr Leung was offering Hong Kong’s registered voters the power to sack him.
But the landmark reform was vetoed by pro-democracy legislators who objected to the election committee vetting mechanism. They essentially said: “If Beijing does not give us everything we want right now, we will reject a compromise that moves us much closer to our final objective.”
Hong Kong’s democrats are, in short, well intentioned men and women of principle, but also tactically inept. Beijing refused their ultimatum and the reform died, meaning that Mr Leung’s successor will be chosen by the election committee as well. The stalemate also sparked the “Occupy Central” protests of 2014 that marked the beginning of the end of Mr Leung’s political career.
Mr Trump seems to believe that he can succeed where Hong Kong’s democrats did not, by forcing Beijing to cross a red line it has said it will never cross. It is true that the US has a lot more leverage over Beijing than Hong Kong does, but recovering Taiwan is also a far more important priority for the Communist party than Hong Kong’s constitutional development.
The US president-elect has indicated that Beijing’s One China policy is a bluff that he can call in return for concessions on other fronts, from trade policy to containment of nuclear North Korea. If Mr Trump needs a second opinion on just how wrong he is, he need only pick up the phone and ring Mr Leung.
Financial Times

C.I.A. Judgment on Russia Built on Swell of Evidence - New York Times

C.I.A. Judgment on Russia Built on Swell of Evidence

By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC LICHTBLAUDEC. 11, 2016

WASHINGTON — American spy and law enforcement agencies were united in the belief, in the weeks before the presidential election, that the Russian government had deployed computer hackers to sow chaos during the campaign. But they had conflicting views about the specific goals of the subterfuge.

Last week, Central Intelligence Agency officials presented lawmakers with a stunning new judgment that upended the debate: Russia, they said, had intervened with the primary aim of helping make Donald J. Trump president.The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.

It is unclear why the C.I.A. did not produce this formal assessment before the election, although several officials said that parts of it had been made available to President Obama in the presidential daily briefing in the weeks before the vote. But the conclusion that Moscow ran an operation to help install the next president is one of the most consequential analyses by American spy agencies in years.

Russian Hackers Acted to Aid Trump in Election, U.S. Says DEC. 9, 2016

Mr. Trump’s response has been to dismiss the reports by citing another famous intelligence assessment — the botched 2002 conclusion that the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, had weapons of mass destruction — and portraying American spies as bumbling and biased.

“I think it’s ridiculous. I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it,” Mr. Trump said on Sunday in an interview on Fox News. Some top Republican congressmen have said the same, although with less bombastic language, arguing that there is no clear proof that the Russians tried to rig the election for Mr. Trump.

Yet there is a loud chorus of bipartisan voices, including Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, going public to accuse the Russians of election interference.

Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the public evidence alone made it clear that Moscow had intervened to help the “most ostentatiously pro-Russian candidate in history.”

“If the Russians were going to interfere, why on earth would they do it to the detriment of the candidate that was pro-Russian?” Mr. Schiff asked.

The dispute cuts to core realities of intelligence analysis. Judgments are often made in a fog of uncertainty, are sometimes based on putting together shards of a mosaic that do not reveal a full picture, and can always be affected by human biases

“This is why I hate the term ‘we speak truth to power,’” said Mark M. Lowenthal, a former senior C.I.A. analyst. “We don’t have truth. We have really good ideas.”

Mr. Lowenthal said that determining the motives of foreign leaders — in this case, what drove President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to order the hacking — was one of the most important missions for C.I.A. analysts. In 2002, one of the critical failures of American spy agencies was their inability to understand Saddam Hussein’s goals and motives.

At the same time, Mr. Lowenthal said, intelligence agencies have always been loath to be seen as taking sides in disputes about American politics.

“This is the one place you don’t want to be as an intelligence officer: the meat in someone’s partisan sandwich,” he said.

Both intelligence and law enforcement officials agree that there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence suggesting that the Russian hacking was primarily aimed at helping Mr. Trump and damaging his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

In July, the infiltration of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers produced embarrassing emails and other internal party documents, the publication of which caused a backlash that led to the resignation of the committee’s chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and her top staff. Just weeks before the election, hacked emails from the account of John D. Podesta, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, were made public and produced numerous stories about the internal dynamics of the campaign. That hack also produced the text of speeches Mrs. Clinton had given to Wall Street banks.

American intelligence officials believe that Russia also penetrated databases housing Republican National Committee data, but chose to release documents only on the Democrats. The committee has denied that it was hacked.

Beyond the specific targets of the hacks, American officials cite broad evidence that Mr. Putin and the Russian government favored Mr. Trump over Mrs. Clinton.

After demonstrators marched through Moscow in 2011 chanting “Putin is a thief” and “Russia without Putin,” Mr. Putin publicly accused Mrs. Clinton, then the secretary of state, of instigating the protests. “She set the tone for some actors in our country and gave them a signal,” he said.

More generally, the Russian government has blamed Mrs. Clinton, along with the C.I.A. and other American officials, for encouraging anti-Russian revolts during the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia and the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine. What Americans saw as legitimate democracy promotion, Mr. Putin saw as an unwarranted intrusion into Russia’s geographic sphere of interest, as the United States once saw Soviet meddling in Cuba.

By contrast, Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin have had a very public mutual admiration society. In December 2015, the Russian president called Mr. Trump “very colorful” — using a Russian word that Mr. Trump and some news outlets mistranslated as “brilliant” — as well as “talented” and “absolutely the leader in the presidential race.” Mr. Trump called Mr. Putin “a strong leader” and further pleased him by questioning whether the United States should defend NATO members that did not spend enough on their militaries.

Russian television, which is tightly controlled by the government, has generally portrayed Mr. Trump as a strong, friendly potential partner while often airing scathing assessments of Mrs. Clinton.

And yet, there is skepticism within the American government, particularly at the F.B.I., that this evidence adds up to proof that the Russians had the specific objective of getting Mr. Trump elected.

A senior American law enforcement official said the F.B.I. believed that the Russians probably had a combination of goals, including damaging Mrs. Clinton and undermining American democratic institutions. Whether one of those goals was to install Mr. Trump remains unclear to the F.B.I., he said.

The official played down any disagreement between the F.B.I. and the C.I.A., and suggested that the C.I.A.’s conclusions were probably more nuanced than they were being framed in the news media.

The agencies’ differences in judgment may also reflect different methods of investigating the Russian interference. The F.B.I., which has both a law enforcement and an intelligence role, is held to higher standards of proof in examining people involved in the hacking because it has an eye toward eventual criminal prosecutions. The C.I.A. has a broader mandate to develop intelligence assessments.

Law enforcement officials said that if F.B.I. agents had the evidence to charge Russians with specific crimes, they would do so. The F.B.I. and federal prosecutors have already gone aggressively after Russian hackers, including two men detained in Thailand and the Czech Republic whom the United States is trying to extradite.

Russia has tried to block those efforts and has accused the United States of harassing its citizens.

The F.B.I. began investigating Russia’s apparent attempts to meddle in the election over the summer. Agents examined numerous possible connections between Russians and members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle, including former Trump aides like Paul Manafort and Carter Page, as well as a mysterious and unexplained trail of computer activity between the Trump Organization and an email account at a large Russian bank, Alfa Bank.

At the height of its investigation before the election, the F.B.I. saw some indications that the Russians might be explicitly seeking to get Mr. Trump elected, officials said, and investigators collected online evidence and conducted interviews overseas and inside the United States to test that theory.

The F.B.I. was concerned enough about Russia’s influence and possible connections to the Trump campaign that it briefed congressional leaders — including Senator Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat and Senate minority leader — on some of the evidence this summer and fall. Mr. Reid, in particular, pressed for the F.B.I. to find out more and charged that the agency was sitting on important information that could implicate Russia.

But the agency’s suspicions about a direct effort by Russia to help Mr. Trump, or about possible connections between the two camps, appear to have waned as the investigation continued into September and October. The reasons are not entirely clear, and F.B.I. officials declined to comment.

Now that a partisan squall has erupted over exactly what role Russia played in influencing the election, there is growing momentum among both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill to have a congressional investigation.

“I’m not trying to relitigate the election,” said Senator Angus King, independent of Maine, who is one of the lawmakers calling for such an investigation. “I’m just trying to prevent this from happening again.”

Adam Goldman, Scott Shane and David E. Sanger contributed reporting.

Trump's cabinet so far - NBC News

President-elect Donald Trump is building out his Cabinet with allies, old friends, and even some former rivals. Here's a look at who Trump has picked so far:


Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. speaks to media at Trump Tower in New York. Carolyn Kaster / AP
Sen. Jeff Sessions, Attorney General — The Alabama senator became the first member of the upper chamber to endorse Trump in February. As the chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Sessions helped Trump craft a hardline immigration plan that he touted would prevent people from entering the country illegally.
Though respected by his Republican colleagues in the Senate, Sessions will likely face Democratic opposition during his nomination hearing for past controversial remarks. Sessions was appointed by President Ronald Reagan for a federal district judgeship in the 1980s, but was blocked by the Senate after being accused of making racially insensitive comments about a former colleague. Thomas Figures, an African-American, said Sessions told him to be careful what he said to "white folks" and once made a comment sympathetic to the KKK. Sessions claimed he had been joking.


General James Mattis served as Commander of U.S. Central Command until his retirement in 2013. YURI GRIPAS / Reuters
Retired Gen. James Mattis, Secretary of Defense — Mattis, a former commander of U.S. Central Command, is known for his blunt, outspoken style and his selection likely signals Trump will take an increasingly hardline stance with Iran. U.S. officials told NBC News that Mattis' philosophy clashed with the Obama administration when it came to handling Iran and U.S. adversaries around the globe.
Mattis, known by the nickname "Mad Dog," aggressively led a Marine division into Baghdad during the 2003 invasion in Iraq. He has openly talked about enjoying war and "brawling." But he is also considered a "warrior monk" with a deep understanding of military strategy and planning.
Mattis, who retired in 2013, will need a Congressional waiver before he can be confirmed. A 1947 law requires a seven-year wait before an active general can head the Pentagon.


Gen. John Kelly has been nominated to head homeland security. Manuel Balce Ceneta / AP
Retired Gen. John F. Kelly, Secretary of Homeland Security — The retired four-star general led the U.S. Southern Command and commanded Marines during some of the most intense fighting in Iraq. Kelly's son, Robert, was killed in combat in Afghanistan, making him the highest-ranking military officer to lose a child during the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. As head of homeland security, Kelly will be responsible for overseeing Trump's controversial immigration plans. As Southern Command chief, Kelly oversaw U.S. military operations in South and Central America -- including the southern border. He, like Trump, has expressed concerns over drug trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border.


Chairman of the House Budget Committee Tom Price (R-GA) has been nominated to head the Department of Health and Human Services. JOSHUA ROBERTS / Reuters
Rep. Tom Price, Secretary of Health and Human Services — Georgia Rep. Tom Price has been one of the fiercest opponents of the Affordable Care Act and his nomination signals Trump intends to make major changes to Obama's signature legislative accomplishment. The six-term Congressman is an orthopedic surgeon and has written a proposal that would drastically alter the health care law by offering tax credits to purchase insurance based on age.
Price describes himself as a member of the Tea Party and opposes both abortion and gay marriage. His nomination drew swift rebuke from advocates of those causes in addition to proponents of Obamacare.


Ben Carson was nominated as HUD secretary. STEVE MARCUS / Reuters
Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development - Trump's former rival finally accepted Trump's offer to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development after first being approached about the position before Thanksgiving. Carson rivaled Trump at the top of the polls for a time during the GOP primaries, but he ultimately fell short and endorsed the eventual nominee despite the heated rhetoric Trump directed his way.
Before his 2016 run, Carson was best known for his work as a neurosurgeon. At 33 years old, Carson became the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Children's Center. He gained international fame for his role in helping to separate infant conjoined twins.


President-elect Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos pose for a photo after their meeting at Trump International Golf Club in Bedminster Township, New Jersey. Drew Angerer / Getty Images
Betsy DeVos, Secretary of the Department of Education — DeVos, a 58-year-old billionaire philanthropist, heads the American Federation for Children. Her group advocates for charter school education and she has been an advocate for school vouchers.
DeVos donated to Carly Fiorina and Jeb Bush during the Republican primaries, though she ultimately endorsed Marco Rubio. Bush praised Trump's pick, saying in a statement she has, "a long and distinguished history championing the right of all parents to choose schools that best ensure their children's success."
Groups like the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers have opposed her nomination, arguing her work promoting charter schools has undercut public education and corporatized the nation's school systems.
The Michigan native is married to Dick DeVos, an heir to the Amway fortune, and is the sister of Erik Prince, founder of the government-contracted security company formerly known as Blackwater.


South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley has been nominated by Trump to lead the U.S. delation to the United Nations. KEVIN LAMARQUE / Reuters
Gov. Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations — South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley quickly accepted Trump's offer to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations after the two spent much of 2016 in a tiff. Haley endorsed Marco Rubio in the lead up the Palmetto State Primary back in February, and at one point called Trump "everything a governor doesn't want in a president." She then backed Ted Cruz after Rubio ended his run, and only tepidly endorsed Trump at the Republican National Convention in July.
Haley became the first woman Trump appointed to his Cabinet, though the 44-year-old's nomination to lead the U.S. delegation to the UN raised some eyebrows since her foreign policy experience is limited. Haley, the daughter of Indian immigrants, served three terms in the South Carolina State House before becoming governor in 2010.


Former US Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao has been nominated to head the Department of Transportation. EDUARDO MUNOZ ALVAREZ / AFP - Getty Images
Elaine Chao, Secretary of Transportation — Trump tapped Chao, a former labor secretary, to head the Department of Transportation. Chao became the first Asian-American woman to hold a Cabinet position when President George W. Bush appointed her labor secretary. She stayed in the post for eight years, becoming the only Cabinet member to serve during Bush's entire time in office.
Chao is married to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and has served as director of the Peace Corps, CEO of the United Way of America. She was the deputy secretary of transportation under President H.W. Bush.


Steven Mnuchin, the national finance chair for Trump's campaign, has been nominated as Secretary of the Treasury. ANDREW GOMBERT / EPA
Steve Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury — Mnuchin served as the Trump campaign's national finance chair and was largely considered the frontrunner for the job. He began his career at Goldman Sachs, where he spent 17 years and rose to become a partner. He left to start his own hedge fund and went on to become a financier of Hollywood films like "Avatar" and "American Sniper." Throughout his career, Mnuchin showed only a limited interest in politics and remained mostly behind the scenes during Trump's run.


Billionaire Wilbur Ross was selected to head the Commerce Department. Drew Angerer / Getty Images
Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Commerce — The 79-year-old billionaire made his fortune by buying up and restructuring companies in industries like steel and coal, the kinds of jobs that Trump has pledged to bring back. He also has been an outspoken critic of free trade agreements, which was a hallmark of Trump's campaign. His relationship with Trump goes back decades. Ross helped Trump keep control of his failing Taj Mahal casino in the 1990s by persuading investors not to push out the real estate mogul.
Ross is expected to face questions during his confirmation about his role in the 2006 Sago Mine disaster in West Virginia. Twelve miners were killed after an explosion there shortly after his company purchased the mine. Ross said he was aware of the mine had multiple violations but said he felt comfortable sending workers into what he thought was a safe situation.
Still Outstanding
Secretary of State: Trump is believed to be considering Rudy Giuliani, John Bolton, Bob Corker, Mitt Romney, David Petraeus for the high-profile post.
Secretary of the Interior: Mary Fallin is believed to be a finalist and Sarah Palin has expressed interest.
Secretary of Veterans Affairs: Palin expressed interest in the position, and Rick Perry is a potential pick.
Secretary of Agriculture: Perry and Sid Miller are believed to be under consideration.
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Energy

ANDREW RAFFERTY

Donald Trump says he is not bothered by comparisons to Hitler - Independent

Donald Trump says he is not bothered by comparisons to Hitler

The comparison between Donald Trump and Hitler is being made more and more frequently — including on the cover of Tuesday's Philadelphia Daily News — but the Republican front-runner said Tuesday that the comparison doesn't bother him.

“You're increasingly being compared to Hitler,” ABC News' George Stephanopoulos said during an interview with Trump on “Good Morning America” Tuesday. “Does that give you any pause at all?”

“No,” Trump responded, “because what I am doing is no different than what FDR — FDR's solution for Germans, Italians, Japanese, you know, many years ago.”

Stephanopoulos jumped in as Trump kept talking: “So you're for internment camps?”

“This is a president who is highly respected by all,” Trump said of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. “He did the same thing — if you look at what he was doing, it was far worse.”

Trump's answer was confusing and meandering but he seemed to be making the point that during times of war, more extreme measures must be used.

“We are now at war,” Trump said. “We have a president that doesn't want to say that, but we are now at war.”

“I've got to press you on that, sir,”Stephanopoulos said. “So you're praising FDR there, I take it you're praising the setting up of internment camps for Japanese during World War II?”

“No, I'm not,” Trump responded. “No, I'm not. No, I'm not.”

Trump then rattled off the numbers of some of the presidential proclamations Roosevelt issued “having to do with alien Germans, alien Italians, alien Japanese.”

“They went through a whole list of things — they couldn't go five miles from their homes, they weren't allowed to use radios, flashlights,” Trump said. “Take a look at what FDR did many years ago, and he's one of the most highly respected presidents... They named highways after him.”

Stephanopoulos responded: “You want to bring back policies like that?”

After a pause, Trump responded: “No, I don't to bring it back, George. At all. I don't like doing it at all. It's a temporary measure until our representatives, many of whom are grossly incompetent, until our representatives can figure out what's going on.”

Stock Market Rally Continues as Indexes Close at Record Highs - TIME Business

Stock Market Rally Continues as Indexes Close at Record Highs

Posted: 08 Dec 2016 01:37 PM PST

Major U.S. stock indexes climbed again on Thursday and set fresh record highs as a month-long rally following the presidential election of Donald Trump rolled on.
Investors have driven up equities since Trump’s Nov. 8 election over optimism about domestic economic stimulus and reduced corporate taxes and regulations.
Supporting the upbeat sentiment on Thursday was a report that showed the number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits fell from a five-month high last week, pointing to labor market strength that underscored the economy’s momentum.
“This is just a continued melt-up post-election. The path of least resistance has been higher,” said Jason Ware, chief investment officer with Albion Financial Group in Salt Lake City, Utah.

“Seasonally, you have a strong period. You have money coming out of the bond market … so that money has to go somewhere,” Ware said.
The Dow Jones industrial average rose 65.19 points, or 0.33 percent, to 19,614.81, the S&P 500 gained 4.84 points, or 0.22 percent, to 2,246.19 and the Nasdaq Composite added 23.59 points, or 0.44 percent, to 5,417.36.
All three indexes set new records, a day after they each posted gains of at least 1 percent. The Russell 2000 index of small-cap stocks, which has soared 15 percent since the election, also hit a new high.
Financials, among the major gainers since the election, led the way again on Thursday, rising 0.9 percent. Industrials, another post-election beneficiary, fell back 0.5 percent, weighed down by defense stocks.
While investors are still adjusting to the economy’s outlook under a Trump administration, “generally speaking, the idea that taxes will be less and regulations will be dialed back seems to be creating not only optimism but laying the groundwork for economic expansion,” said Bucky Hellwig, senior vice president at BB&T Wealth Management in Birmingham, Alabama.
“So if you own stock, you want to hold onto it. If you don’t, you want to buy it,” Hellwig said.
The Dow Jones Transport index rose 0.5 percent, a day after setting a new closing record high for the first time in two years. The fresh high triggered a bullish sign for some investors who look for parallel performance for both the Dow industrial and transportation averages.
Adding to positive sentiment for equities has been recent positive economic data, as well as S&P 500 companies poised to end a streak of declining profits with their third-quarter results.
Investors on Thursday were digesting the European Central Bank’s decision to trim back its asset buys but also its vow of protracted stimulus to aid a still-fragile recovery.
Next week’s Federal Reserve meeting, at which the U.S. central bank is widely expected to raise interest rates, is also coming into focus as market participants seek clues about the future pace of any rate hikes.
In corporate news, Lululemon soared 15 percent after the yoga and leisure apparel retailer reported a better-than-expected quarterly profit.
Express Scripts shares tumbled 6.7 percent after short-seller Citron Research called the pharmacy benefit manager the “real culprit” in drug price gouging.
About 8 billion shares changed hands in U.S. exchanges, just above the 7.8 billion daily average over the last 20 sessions.
Advancing issues outnumbered declining ones on the NYSE by a 1.69-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 2.06-to-1 ratio favored advancers.
The S&P 500 posted 112 new 52-week highs and 4 new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 481 new highs and 28 new lows.

Donald Trump’s Harassment of a Teenage Girl on Twitter Led to Death and Rape Threats - New York Magazine

Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump

The arrogant young woman who questioned me in such a nasty fashion at No Labels yesterday was a Jeb staffer! HOW CAN HE BEAT RUSSIA & CHINA?

In October 2015, then-18-year-old Lauren Batchelder asked Trump a question at a political forum in New Hampshire. “So, maybe I’m wrong, maybe you can prove me wrong, but I don’t think you’re a friend to women,” she said. Trump defended himself, and Batchelder took the mic again, asking if she’d get equal pay and access to abortion with Trump as president. Trump answered: “You’re going to make the same if you do as good of a job, and I happen to be pro-life, okay?”

Batchelder thought that was the end of it, but when she woke up the next day, she realized that the current president-elect had sent out a series of tweets about her. “The arrogant young woman who questioned me in such a nasty fashion at No Labels yesterday was a Jeb staffer!” he tweeted. (Batchelder is not, and has never been, a staffer for Jeb Bush, though she did volunteer for his campaign.) His followers replied with screenshots of Batchelder and posted her phone number and other personal information online.

Within hours, her phone began to ring, and her email inbox and Facebook account filled with threatening messages. “I didn’t really know what anyone was going to do,” Batchelder, now 19, told the Washington Post. “He was only going to tweet about it and that was it, but I didn’t really know what his supporters were going to do, and that to me was the scariest part.”

She said the abuse has continued, prompting one Trump supporter to send her a Facebook message five days before the election that read, “Wishing I could f—ing punch you in the face. id then proceed to stomp your head on the curb and urinate in your bloodied mouth and i know where you live, so watch your f—ing back punk.”

Batchelder’s case illustrates what happens when Trump, who has more than 17 million Twitter followers, goes after a private citizen online. And far from showing restraint as his following has grown, Trump has continued the pattern. On Wednesday he attacked Chuck Jones, a union leader, who wrote in the Washington Post Thursday that his office is now receiving threats, too By Claire Landsbaum -

David Cameron on Brexit, Donald Trump and why he does not regret calling a referendum - Telegraph

David Cameron on Brexit, Donald Trump and why he does not regret calling a referendum

Harriet Alexander, greencastle, indiana

9 DECEMBER 2016 • 6:58AM

David Cameron has used his first major speech since resigning in June to explain why he felt people voted for Brexit – and defend his decision to hold the referendum.

Mr Cameron, speaking at DePauw University in Indiana, also spoke of similarities between the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump – and he used his platform in the United States to urge Mr Trump to respect the “incredibly precious” American values of freedom, tolerance and outward-looking policies.

In a wide-ranging address – funded by former students Sharon and Timothy Ubben, who since 1986 have invited Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Benazir Bhutto and Mikhail Gorbachev to speak - the former prime minister warned against being seduced by “so-called strongmen” leaders, such as Vladimir Putin.

And he said that he did not think other European countries would follow Britain’s lead and leave the EU – although he had deep fears for the future of the euro.

“It’s kind of you to have this ex prime minister here tonight,” he told the crowd inside the sports hall, 40 miles from Indianapolis.

“Because of course, the last time the British had a prime minister my age was about 202 years ago, and that ended up with the British invading North America and burning down the White House.”

The audience laughed, as he added: “Watching your politics recently, I wondered whether you might do it yourself.”

On the decision to hold the referendum

Mr Cameron insisted that he had no regrets in holding the referendum – despite acknowledging that it would be remembered, unfairly in his view, as his lasting legacy for the country.

The 50-year-old said told the students and alumni that he felt British politics was becoming “poisoned” by not having had a referendum on the EU for 40 years, despite the EU having changed significantly from when it was founded.

“I believed and I still believe that the fact we hadn’t had a referendum on this issue for 40 years – in spite of the fact that the European Union was changing and changing – was beginning to poison British politics,” he said.

“It was certainly poisoning politics in my own party. And I think, more importantly, people were feeling they had been promised a referendum - but people were beginning to get very frustrated about this issue.

“In the end, we had to decide.

“As we try and build the globalisation that works for all our countries and all our people – as we do that, we have to listen to what people want. And people do want a say on these issues.”

On why Britain voted to leave

Mr Cameron said that he say the Leave vote as being motivated for economic and cultural reasons.

“We have seen a vast increase in wealth and prosperity, and people in the poorest countries lifted out of poverty through globalisation. But let’s be clear: the rising tide has not lifted all boats. There are many people in our own countries who feel, rightly, economically left behind through globalisation,” he said.

“There is a second phenomena: a cultural phenomena.

“In some of our countries the pace of change has been too fast for people to keep up with. People are concerned that the country they are living in is not the country they were born into. And they see that change as happening too fast."

Describing himself as “pro globalisation, pro immigration, pro market economics” he said that leaders needed to understand the calls for change.

“The simple truth is this; if we don’t address the problem of those who are economically left behind, we open up our politics to the parties of the extreme left. And if we don’t address the concerns about the pace of cultural change, we open up our politics to the parties of the extreme right.”

However, he cited political analysts who had discovered that if people said they were concerned about the changing makeup of Britain, and the fact that it was “going in the wrong direction,” that was a stronger indicator of a Leave vote than if you asked them about their salary.

He said it was now the job for politicians to acknowledge those feelings, and work to resolve them.

“If they put their heads in the sand and say this will pass, and we will just carry on the way things are – then 2016 will be seen as a real watershed,” he said.

“But if, as I believe will happen, our democracies are flexible enough, and our leaders are aware enough, then they will course correct – as I put it.”

On whether other European nations will follow suit

Mr Cameron said he did not think other EU countries would leave the EU.

Marine Le Pen would be defeated in France, he predicted, and the elections in the Netherlands would not force their country out of the EU either.

He said Britain was uniquely uninspired by the EU – something he credited with Britain’s long history of being strong and independent.

“I think Britain particularly never loved the institutions of the EU,” he said.

“Even those of us who wanted to remain certainly felt no affection for the way the organisation worked. We knew needed to be there for trade and cooperation and working together, but the affection for the institutions – particularly as Britain has had such a successful history with our own independent institutions – simply was not there.”

On Brexit and Donald Trump

During the US election campaign, Mr Cameron, then prime minister, criticised some of Mr Trump’s rhetoric as being “divisive and wrong”.

But he acknowledged that his supporters and the Brexit voters shared similar concerns – about being left behind in an increasingly globalised world, and not feeling the benefits of economic successes.

“I think the similarities are: we are both successful economies. You have seen in the United States a growth, and a big fall in unemployment – just like you have in the United Kingdom.

“I think that economic concern, that somehow globalisation isn’t working for everybody, was at the heart of the Brexit decision and also a very big issue in your election.

“But I don’t think it is enough to explain the results.

“If you ask someone in Britain if the country is going in the wrong direction, or if Britain isn’t as great as it used to be, or uncertain about change in your community – that is a better indicator that you’d be a Brexit voter, rather than is your income at this level or that level.

“So I would say you need to understand this political phenomenon through both the issues – and that is the same in both situations.”

On the Special Relationship

Mr Cameron described himself as having a “very strong” relationship with President Barack Obama, noting how, in his opinion, they worked well as a team – despite being from different political sides.

“In any international gathering, or any subject that came up, even though I was a Conservative and Barack Obama was a Democrat, we basically had so much shared language and knowledge and approach about how we would tackle these problems, that we would communicate very quickly, see each other’s arguments very quickly, and see how to work together,” he said.

He expected, he said, Theresa May and Mr Trump to continue to have a fine working relationship.

But he stressed that the Special Relationship was about more than the individuals involved – that it was military, security, and intelligence links, and shared culture and values.

He said he did not expect the Special Relationship to change, with Mr Trump in the White House and Mrs May in Number 10.

On Donald Trump’s presidency

Mr Cameron did not provide any specific recommendations for Mr Trump. But his words could certainly be taken as meant for the incoming president.

He backed his calls for border enforcement, saying that having a defined policy on immigration is key – “we may not need a wall, but we do need borders that work and are seen to work. We need that in Europe, just as you need that in the United States,” he said.

The former Conservative leader urged against being bewitched by “so-called strongmen leaders, in places such as Russia” – insisting that the American values of democracy, freedom and tolerance were its greatest strength.

He also said that, to survive in turbulent times, the US must remember its principals and values, and not seek quick fixes.

“This is still the most successful country on earth,” he said. “You are at the cutting edge of all the industries of the future.

“You have an educated and trained workforce, and I am sure you will do even more to do that in the future.

“And this is the country that people aspire to. People want to be like the United Kingdom, or the US People want to live in our countries. They believe in our values, they believe we have the keys to unlock the progress they want to see.

“And you don’t need a former British prime minister to tell you this – but I would say: have confidence in the values that made this country so great and you won’t go far wrong in the future.”

On Syria

Mr Cameron said his worst moments as prime minister had been watching the videos of Jihadi John beheading American and British citizens – but one of his best moments was when the terrorist was “put a stop to.”

And he said that he believed the West had been too slow to respond to Syria, and drew parallels with Rwanda.

He insisted that President Bashar al-Assad remained part of the problem, but said that first Isil had to be defeated militarily, as Mr Trump has maintained.

The former prime minister said that the fundamental problem was having governments which did not represent their people – Sunni, Shia, Kurd or Alawites included.

“We need a government that is going to represent Sunni, Shia, or whatever else.

“They don’t have to be perfect democracies. We can’t be perfectionists. The road to democracy is a long one – and can be a messy and difficult one.

“The basic requirement is look after their people, and that is the same in Iraq and Syria and Yemen and elsewhere.”

On his life after politics

Mr Cameron joked, when asked how he was spending his time, that he was “available for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs.”

He also made the audience laugh when he told them that his son had remarked, as he was leaving for his flight: “Dad, why are you wearing a suit? It’s not like you have a job or anything.”

But he said that he was writing his book, speaking to audiences, and doing pro bono work for the National Citizen Service.

He sounded a somewhat wistful note, however, when asked about his departure from the frontlines of British public life.

“I am writing a book about my time in politics,” he said. “Rather sad to be doing it at the age of 50, but there we are.”