Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul class="summary-list"><li><a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg">Mark Zuckerberg</a> played it safe this election — deemphasizing politics on Meta's platforms.</li><li>Although Donald Trump has said he would like to put Zuckerberg in jail, that's highly unlikely.</li></ul>Mark Zuckerberg has been burned before. In the elections of 2016 and 2020, Facebook came under intense scrutiny. (And it's still going on: There was a <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx">Supreme Court hearing</a> Wednesday over lingering issues from the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-deposition-sec-facebook-user-data-cambridge-analytica-2022-12">Cambridge Analytica scandal</a>.)In 2024, Zuckerberg and Meta played it safe by trying to stay as far away from the election as possible. No more elaborate efforts to register voters on Facebook. No more <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attacks-mark-zuckerberg-in-an-angry-statement-2021-10">$400 million donations to get-out-the-vote efforts</a> like in 2020. No more promoting news pages or Facebook Groups that might do things like organize a large and dangerous rally.Meta nipped the whole thing in the bud by <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/threads-twitter-politics-not-the-focus-adam-mosseri-2023-7">tamping down news and political content</a> recommendations across Facebook, Threads, and Instagram. Sure, this was at least in part because user feedback told them we all wanted less political content — but it also happened to be quite convenient for a company that wanted out of the nightmare of continuous controversies anyway.The strategy paid off: On Tuesday, there's little talk of Meta's role in the election. Zuckerberg's would-be grappling partner, Elon Musk, did the exact opposite: He went all-in on Trump with both <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-twitter-donald-trump-wealth-campaign-influence-2024-11">his own money and the heft of his social platform</a>. That turned out well for Musk — but it was a risk.So Meta made it through the election without half the country convinced that it helped cause the result. Meanwhile, Zuckerberg is unlikely to be dragged in front of Congress to answer questions about his platform's perceived bias.What a Trump administration means for Meta, well, we'll see. There are some <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-presidency-affect-big-tech-2024-11">potential downsides for Big Tech</a> — tariffs could hurt parts of their businesses, for example. And Meta is already facing a variety of legal battles with states. But any possible outcomes — good or bad — are more in the realm of normal ups and downs, not existential reckonings or crises. For Meta, it'll likely be broadly business as usual.As far as <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-comments-about-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-feud-history-2024-7">Trump's threat to jail Zuckerberg</a>? I'll eat my hat and Trump's if that actually happens. It was part of the rhetoric from Trump grumbling about the 2020 election outcome. Now that he's won in a clear and decisive way, I think he'll move on.And Zuckerberg, like some other CEOs, seems to have figured out the most effective way to manage Trump: deal with him privately — <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-had-undisclosed-dinner-donald-trump-2019-11">Zuckerberg met with Trump</a> at an undisclosed dinner in 2019 — and praise him publicly. After the assassination attempt on Trump in July, Zuckerberg referred to Trump as looking "badass."On Wednesday, Zuckerberg continued to play it safe. He posted a message to Threads congratulating Trump on his win. But he was apparently playing it truly safe: He didn't post his message until two hours after <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/business-leaders-react-donald-trump-winning-election-silicon-valley-2024-11">Jeff Bezos posted a congratulations message</a> of his own.

Mark Zuckerberg played it safe with Donald Trump this election. That strategy worked.

The internet insists on calling a spade a spade. The internet will also pompously convince you that they have personally worked with a variety of spades and that they intimately understand how these fantastic tools curve precisely around their working edges for maximum utility. However, any amount or manner of squinting will also reveal that the tool they’re referring to, is in fact, a shovel. Despite the fact that humans today indubitably can access information like before in history, there is still a terrible misinformation pandemic afoot. When it isn’t producing dizzying Mandela Effects to reconcile with, it is mobilising the public with pitchforks, rallying them for a cause they didn’t care about until a week ago. A similar incident transpired during the recent 2024 Paris Olympics, where the identity of Algerian boxer <keyword id="22621786" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="imane-khelif" source="keywords">Imane Khelif</keyword> came under intense scrutiny after her historic gold — with some media outlets and influential personalities also aiding the uproar. Since the initial row dragged in high-profile figures such as <keyword id="19903807" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="elon-musk" source="keywords">Elon Musk</keyword> and Trump, a leaked medical report has claimed to “confirm” Imane’s male-ness. This renewed public discourse on the matter, with various Indian media outlets once again casually labelling the athlete as “a man”. For example, a headline in the Hindustan Times ran, “Imane <keyword id="22633929" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="khelif" source="keywords">Khelif</keyword>, Paris Olympics medalist, confirmed a man in leaked medical report”, and another article by Livemint claimed Khelif was "confirmed as man" following the leak of her medical details. Similar headlines were being carried by a host of mainstream outlets, including The Indian Express and Moneycontrol. Science suggests that there is a great deal of nuance to gender and identity, concepts that are misrepresented due to a lack of gender studies in traditional education. Reporting Khelif to be a man, based solely on reported biological characteristics is highly misleading when discussing both the medical and societal implications of gender identity. To clear the confusion, let’s look at the official definitions of gender, explore Khelif’s reported medical condition, and review the consequences of how media coverage can amplify misunderstandings and bias. <h2>Where the new controversy started</h2>The recent controversy began when a leaked medical report indicated that Khelif has XY chromosomes, internal testes, and lacks a uterus, potentially due to a rare genetic condition called 5-alpha reductase deficiency. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="112218392" title="Imane Khelif: Is it accurate to label this female-born boxer as ‘biological male’ or ‘transgender’?" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>This was nothing new, as a similar report had helped Khelif become the subject of substantial media and public scrutiny in the past as well. During the Olympics, however, statements from high-profile figures like former US President <keyword id="19918985" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="donald-trump" source="keywords">Donald Trump</keyword> and author <keyword id="20260304" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="jk-rowling" source="keywords">JK Rowling</keyword> — who insisted that Khelif was an ineligible man — helped catapult public discourse on gender and sports to astronomical levels. In response, Khelif filed a complaint in France against Trump, Rowling, and Elon Musk, citing cyber harassment and arguing that the comments about her identity amount to public harassment. Despite the reports and the outrage, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has upheld her eligibility to compete in the women’s division, acknowledging her identity as a woman. They based their decision on her lifelong identification as female and her history of competing as such, setting an example of inclusivity while recognising the complexities of gender and biological diversity. <h2>Difference between sex and gender</h2>Understanding Khelif’s case requires better clarity on the terms “sex” and “gender.” While the public may use them interchangeably, there are important differences that are rooted in many fields of science. Sex typically refers to biological differences — chromosomes, hormones, and reproductive anatomy. Gender, however, encompasses the social roles, behaviours, and identities that individuals embody, which may or may not align with their biological sex. A helpful way to think about this distinction is by analogy. Consider how some people have genetically blue eyes while others have brown eyes — these are inherent biological characteristics. However, people might choose to wear contact lenses to change their eye colour, much like how gender identity can vary depending on how individuals view themselves and how they are seen within society. Another popular — albeit somewhat controversial — manner of comparing the two is to think of a person’s sex as their “hardware”, while their gender is the “software” they run on. As such, a person’s biology might suggest certain physical traits, but their gender identity could align differently based on personal and cultural factors. To help them feel more at ease with their bodies, many individuals often undergo hormone therapy and counselling. Some even opt for “gender-affirming” surgeries to modify their physical appearances to match up with the gender they feel the most comfortable in. It is also key to recognise that, for some people, gender identity is flexible and can evolve over time. While biological sex generally remains constant, some people may feel more connected to a specific gender at certain points in their lives, while at other times, they feel aligned with another. This concept, called gender fluidity, shows that gender identity isn't always fixed, and is instead shaped by a blend of inner feelings and external experiences, meaning it can shift naturally over time. Supporting this fluidity helps people feel accepted and understood. <h2>Media language and its implications</h2>Due to these reasons, it is problematic when media outlets refer to Khelif as a "man" or "confirmed as man" in their headlines, which is often the only section of the news most read nowadays. These titles communicate to the general public that biology alone dictates gender identity, a stance inconsistent with widely accepted definitions and understandings of gender today. For instance, even the <keyword id="19896311" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="world-health-organization" source="keywords">World Health Organization</keyword> (WHO) differentiates between sex and gender based on the biological and socially constructed characteristics discussed earlier, insisting that calling someone a man based on sex-linked traits alone oversimplifies their identity and disregards personal self-identification. Not just the WHO, major organisations such as the American Psychological Association (APA) and the United Nations differentiate sex and gender in a similar manner. Science aside, news outlets have a responsibility to handle sensitive issues like gender identity with nuance and respect. While transparency in reporting is essential, invasive coverage of Khelif's private medical details and sensationalised labelling may infringe upon her privacy. Moreover, by framing her gender identity in simplistic terms, the media risks reinforcing stereotypes and marginalising individuals with differences in sex development or gender diversity. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="112240010" title="Dutee Chand extends support to under-fire boxer Imane Khalif following controversial win in Paris Olympics" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>Overall, such rare, unique, and complex cases must be handled by the appropriate and informed authorities and should not be subject to a media trial. Ethically, a more respectful approach would involve using gender-neutral terms when discussing Khelif’s eligibility and refraining from language that disregards her self-identification as a woman. Such reporting would be in line with journalistic guidelines that emphasise minimising harm and respecting the dignity of individuals, especially those in vulnerable or marginalised communities. <h2>What even is 5-Alpha Reductase Deficiency?</h2>The condition reportedly attributed to Khelif, 5-alpha reductase deficiency, is a rare genetic condition. Individuals with this condition have XY chromosomes, but their bodies do not effectively convert testosterone into dihydrotestosterone (DHT), an androgen responsible for male genital development. Consequently, people with this condition often appear female or have ambiguous genitalia at birth, although they might undergo masculinising changes at puberty. Notably, people with 5-alpha reductase deficiency are typically assigned female at birth in societies with limited access to advanced genetic testing. Even Imane’s assigned gender was 'female' at birth, as per the official birth certificate shared by her family after the initial controversy during the Paris Olympics. Many of these individuals live as women and some self-identify as female throughout their lives. Thus, it would be misleading to categorically label them as male solely due to their chromosomal makeup, as this does not reflect their lived gender experience. The controversy surrounding Imane Khelif raises essential questions about gender identity and eligibility criteria in competitive sports. Many governing bodies are grappling with these issues, and it is clear that a single set of criteria may not accommodate the complexities of gender. Striking a balance between fair competition and the inclusion of all athletes will require policies informed by medical insights and a compassionate understanding of gender identity. Moving forward, it is essential that media, sports organisations, and the public alike strive to understand gender identity as an intricate intersection of biology, identity, and culture. Disclaimer: This article uses she/her pronouns considering that Imane identifies herself as female and a woman, and we were unable to find any public information on her preferred pronouns. However, this does not imply any form of judgement on the athlete’s gender identity. The decision on whether such athletes should be allowed to participate in competitions must be left to appropriate authorities and should not be made on social or digital media.

Imane Khelif Olympic gold controversy resurfaces. Is it accurate to term the Algerian boxer a “confirmed man”?

<ul class="summary-list"><li>During his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump said he would "never ban TikTok."</li><li>Without court intervention, TikTok could be banned right as Trump takes office.</li></ul>Donald Trump may not be able to save TikTok, despite pledging to do so on the campaign trail.In June, the president-elect <a target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@thecharliekirkshow/video/7377527307478502699?lang=en">told the app's users</a> he would "never ban TikTok." This may have earned him some support from the app's fans, business partners, and <a target="_blank" href="https://affiliate.insider.com?h=b5b9c47f7ad2534ac9824b21bff40dd26be554e92c0b5e20ae01820f3d7c30dd&amp;postID=672cd6f11153528a7c51e509&amp;postSlug=donald-trump-block-tiktok-ban-legal-experts-2024-11&amp;site=bi&amp;u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theinformation.com%2Farticles%2Ftiktok-sees-trump-victory-as-apps-best-hope">employees</a> who rely on TikTok to make money.As things stand, TikTok is still marching toward its demise due to an <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-passes-tiktok-ban-2024-4">April law</a> passed by Congress that forces its owner, ByteDance, to either divest from its US assets or face a ban from app stores.TikTok is challenging the law in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. So far, <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktok-justice-department-federal-appeals-court-law-ban-expert-2024-9">it's not going great for the company</a>. TikTok is making a free-speech argument against alleged national security concerns tied to its owner being based in China, which the US government has designated a foreign adversary. The DC Circuit often <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktok-ban-bill-is-first-amendment-disaster-may-survive-courts-2024-4">shows deference to Congress</a> when it comes to national security. The case may ultimately end up in the Supreme Court.Without court intervention, the app is set to be either sold (<a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/bytedance-prefers-tiktok-shutdown-us-if-legal-options-fail-sources-say-2024-04-25/">unlikely</a>) or banned on January 19, the day before the inauguration. Before leaving office, President Joe Biden has the option to extend that deadline by 90 days, and he hasn't indicated he will do so.Legal experts told Business Insider that TikTok's future in the US is still very much in question despite Trump's election win. The company has to prevail in the courts first to give its app a shot at sticking around, as Trump can't simply repeal the law."Because the law was enacted by Congress, I'm not sure how much wiggle room a future Trump administration would have to ignore it," G.S. Hans, a clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School, told BI.Trump could try to persuade Congress to repeal or change the law, although that seems unlikely, said Matthew Schettenhelm, a litigation and policy analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence."If TikTok loses the case, as I expect, it's much harder to see Trump stopping the ban from taking effect on January 19," he said.Trump has two options to try to rescue TikTok once in office. Neither of them is straightforward, legal sources told BI.<h2 id="fb3fb3bc-ea37-4e4d-85a0-a6b8468f562e">Strategy one: Don't enforce the law</h2>Trump could guard TikTok by asking his Justice Department not to enforce the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act regarding TikTok."There's some history with Justice Departments or the president taking issue with a law that's on the books, not enforcing it, potentially declaring it unlawful itself, or refusing to defend it," said Aram A. Gavoor, a former Justice Department senior counsel who now serves as associate dean for academic affairs at the George Washington University Law School.As an example, Gavoor pointed to the decision by former president Barack Obama's administration to stop defending the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/landmark-supreme-court-rulings-marriage-equality-in-us-2022-12">Defense of Marriage Act</a>, a since overturned law that banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage.If Trump avoids enforcing the divest-or-ban law, it may not stand up to a legal challenge, as it's possible the Supreme Court will have already upheld its constitutionality by the time he attempts to ignore it.And if Trump's Justice Department opts not to defend the law, Bloomberg's Schettenhelm said it could be risky for American companies like Apple and Google that host TikTok in app stores to keep it around. Trump has already <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/why-trump-changed-his-mind-on-tiktok-2024-3">flip-flopped</a> on TikTok after <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-tiktok-ban-us-china-explained-in-30-seconds-2020-8">attempting to ban</a> and then <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tiktok-deadline-september-15-2020-9">force a sale</a> of the app in 2020. Who's to say that he may not change his mind again?"I'm not sure they'd want to risk enormous liability on the hope that President Trump wouldn't change his mind and start enforcing the law against them," Schettenhelm said.<h2 id="c37a6b94-014a-4402-8322-8968e29dce20">Strategy two: Act like the law doesn't apply to TikTok</h2>Trump could also claim that TikTok isn't subject to the divest-or-ban bill.This one feels a bit absurd, as the bill specifically names TikTok and ByteDance as covered companies.Gavoor said it's possible that TikTok and ByteDance could reorganize so that they don't "trigger the direct definition of their names or a subsidiary or a successor entity" under the law."There's a variety of different potential corporate structures that they're undoubtedly considering," Gavoor said.University of Minnesota law professor Alan Rozenshtein also told <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.fastcompany.com/91223946/will-trump-ban-tiktok">Fast Company</a> that Trump could declare that ByteDance divested from TikTok without actually requiring it to do so. Both these approaches would attempt to skirt around the bill's language to avoid enforcing it.Cornell's Hans said any tactic a future Trump administration might take to keep TikTok around would be "uncharted territory.""Given that the effective date of the law is the day before inauguration day, there are all sorts of open questions as to how this will play out," he said.Of course, given all the legal obstacles, Trump may decide that saving TikTok isn't worth the effort as he pursues other issues in his first days in office.Representatives for the Trump campaign and TikTok did not respond to requests for comment.

Donald Trump's pledge to 'never ban' TikTok will be tough to fulfill, legal experts say

India could see a shift in foreign direct investment (FDI) trends in the second term of Donald Trump (Trump 2.0) as President of the United States, says a research report by the State Bank of India. The report highlighted that under his first term, Trump 1.0, the Trump administration made sweeping regulatory changes aimed at attracting investments back to the U.S., which impacted FDI inflows globally, including India. It added that if similar policies are reintroduced in Trump 2.0 also, it could create challenges for emerging markets like India, which rely on FDI as a significant driver of economic growth. Notably, a recent Kotak report highlighted that a complete Republican control over all arms of the US government would mean increased US earnings via corporate tax cuts, higher tariffs on imports into the US and greater US fiscal deficits. The first two could spell doom for emerging markets like India and China, since foreign investors will make a beeline for investing more money in the US markets, which will come at the cost of intense selloff in emerging markets. However, higher fiscal deficits will eventually lead to the dollar weakening after the initial euphoria dies down. "India may see shifts in foreign direct investments (FDIs) during Trump 2.0. The Trump 1.0 administration saw significant regulatory changes aimed at attracting investments back to the US," the SBI report stated. However, given that India has been gradually diversifying its sources of FDI (foreign direct investments), this trend could serve as a buffer against any potential decline. Moreover, domestic institutional investors have been stepping up big time, maintaining some balance to the massive exodus of FIIs over the past month. So far in November 2024, FIIs have withdrawn Rs 19,849 crores from the cash segment in Indian markets, while DIIs have poured in Rs 14,014.18 crores as of November 10th, 2024. "India is no longer dependent on the traditional sources of FDI inflows... unlike the recent past, FDI is now coming in many new sectors," noted the SBI report. Unlike a decade ago, when most FDI inflows came from a limited number of traditional sectors, India is now attracting investment in a wide array of industries, including renewable energy, sea transport, medical devices, and surgical appliances. Data suggests over the last 24 years, i.e., between April 2000 and June 2024, FDIs have poured in $1,013.4 billion in the Indian economy. Out of this, 67%, i.e., $689.88 billion, has come in just the last 10 years. The report added there are up to 12 emerging sectors showing strong FDI interest, which could help offset any loss of inflows in conventional sectors if there is a shift in global investment patterns under another Trump administration. In the last financial year, the top 5 sectors that have received the highest quantum of FDI inflow include the services sector (finance, banking, insurance, and business) which makes up about 16% of the inflows. This is followed computer software &amp; hardware, which constitute around 15% of total FDI flows. Trading and telecommunications follows with a share of 6% each, and Automobile Industry comes next with a 5% share. In the short term, the potential for increased U.S. tariffs, more restrictive H-1B visa policies, and a stronger dollar could bring some volatility to India's trade and investment landscape. However, in the long term, these challenges might also encourage India to expand its manufacturing capabilities, diversify export markets, and focus on becoming economically more self-reliant. Notably, India has maintained a merchandise trade surplus with the U.S. despite tariffs imposed during Trump's first term. This indicates that Indian exports have remained resilient, and there is potential to strengthen this trade relationship further by capitalizing on emerging sectors and reducing dependency on traditional industries. Suman Chowdhury, Executive Director &amp; Chief Economist, Acuité Ratings &amp; Research Limited cautions that in the medium to long term, the trade relationship with the US may see a structural improvement. "Higher tariff and trade restrictions in the US with China should translate into better opportunities for exports of manufactured goods from India", he adds.

FDIs may shift to US under Trump 2.0 but it is unlikely to severely impact FDIs inflow to India, says SBI Report

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Citi has spent more than $7.4 billion to make peace with regulators and hasn't succeeded.</li><li>Donald Trump's election and promise of deregulation bode well for the bank.</li></ul>Donald Trump's presidential victory and his promise of light regulation could help relieve one of Citi's biggest problems. Trump's reelection on Wednesday already boosted the <a target="_blank" href="https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/bank-stocks-donald-trump-victory-reelection-wall-street-outlook-regulation-2024-11">bank's stock</a> by 8.4%.Citi has been in hot water with regulators since 2020, paying a total of <a target="_blank" href="https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/citigroup-slammed-400-mln-fine-longstanding-deficiencies-regulation-occ-fed-2020-10-1029660295?_gl=1*160cwwk*_ga*MTM0NTA0MDc3NC4xNjA5MzYwMzUx*_ga_E21CV80ZCZ*MTczMDkyNjYzMy4xNzQ4LjEuMTczMDkyNzg5Ny4zNi4wLjA.">$400 million in fines</a> for poor data management and risk controls. The bank was slapped with<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/citi-jane-fraser-regulatory-citigroup-transformation-2024-7"> $135.6 million in fines</a> in July for failing to make enough progress to satisfy the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. The delay is despite Citi spending more than $7.4 billion and allocating 13,000 employees to a firmwide <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/citi-anand-selva-transformation-consent-orders-fines-2024-10">"Transformation" initiative</a> to rectify the issues.Wells Fargo analyst Mike Mayo called Trump's win a "regulatory game changer" in a research note. He told Business Insider that Citi is still in "regulatory purgatory" but that the bank would likely face less scrutiny for its data quality issues."With a fresh look with a new set of regulators, I do think it makes a difference that the recent regulatory actions did not involve clients," he said. "This is more about Citi doing what it's supposed to do with its regulators as opposed to fixing any new issues with customers."Mayo thought it was unlikely for the agencies to rescind their demands altogether but that the new restrictions in July might be unwound. For instance, the OCC has required Citi to submit plans each quarter to ensure they are allocating enough resources to the Transformation effort.While Trump has not announced a formal policy on how he would regulate Wall Street, he has signaled he would cut down on oversight. In a speech at the Economic Club of New York in September, he pledged if re-elected, he would eliminate 10 rules for each new rule introduced.A <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-win-senate-election-majority-election-2024-11">Republican majority</a> in the Senate has also paved the way for new agency appointments. Michael Hsu, the current head of the OCC, has <a target="_blank" href="https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/speeches/2023/pub-speech-2023-7.pdf">said</a> that large banks that fail to manage risk effectively should be broken up as a last resort. Trump has openly criticized Federal Reserve chair <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-campaign-fed-independence-jerome-powell-interes-rates-politics-2024-4">Jerome Powell</a>, accusing him of trying to help the Democrats keep the presidency."Having the presidency and the Senate means you can put anybody you want into these positions and get through these secretaries of various bodies and so forth," said Stephen Biggar, managing director of Argus Research. "The Senate will be cooperative and that only helps the cause for banks and all things bank regulation."Since the July fines, Citi has faced mounting pressure. In October, Sen. Elizabeth Warren urged the OCC to "impose growth restrictions" on Citi, arguing that it has grown "too big to manage." (The regulator and Citi declined to comment.)A few weeks later, Fraser was dogged by questions in an earnings call about the bank's regulatory fate. She was asked three times for reassurances that Citi did not and would not have an <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/citi-jane-fraser-regulators-occ-frb-consent-orders-asset-cap-2024-10">asset cap</a> before answering the question."Let me be crystal clear," Fraser said after JPMorgan analyst Vivek Juneja raised the issue. "We do not have an asset cap and there are no additional measures other than what was announced in July in place and not expecting any."Her odds just got better.Do you work for Citi? Have a tip or story to share? Reach out to Hayley Cuccinello at <a target="_blank" href="mailto:hcuccinello@businessinsider.com">hcuccinello@businessinsider.com</a> or 917 740 5340, which works for calls, text, and the encrypted messaging app Signal.

You Searched For "donald trump india effect" and got 5 results

Mark Zuckerberg played it safe with Donald Trump this election. That strategy worked.

Katie Notopoulos

Imane Khelif Olympic gold controversy resurfaces. Is it accurate to term the Algerian boxer a “confirmed man”?

Ankush Banerjee

Donald Trump's pledge to 'never ban' TikTok will be tough to fulfill, legal experts say

Dan Whateley

FDIs may shift to US under Trump 2.0 but it is unlikely to severely impact FDIs inflow to India, says SBI Report

Ira Alok Puranik

Citi needs a white knight. Donald Trump's second term might provide one.

Hayley Cuccinello

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides