Skip to main content

Featured

Weekly Market Snapshot: June 9–13, 2026

Canadian markets closed out a turbulent week on a positive note, as the Bank of Canada's decision to hold its benchmark rate at 2.25% and easing Iran tensions helped the TSX recover from a mid-week dip to finish the week up roughly 1.53% . A surprise Dollarama earnings beat gave the retail sector an additional lift. 📊 Market Scoreboard — Week of June 9–13 Index / Asset Level (Fri. Close) Weekly Change S&P/TSX Composite 34,937.85 ▲ +1.53% S&P 500 (USD) ~7,431 ▲ ~+0.6% wk Dow Jones (USD) 51,202 ▲ +0.7% Fri CAD/USD 0.7160 ▼ Modest pressure WTI Crude Oil (USD/bbl) ~$84.29 ▼ 8-wk low Gold (USD/oz) ~$4,226 ▲ ~2.8% Sources: Yahoo Finance Canada, Trading Economics, TMX Money. Figures reflect approximate Friday close / intraday levels as of June 13, 2026. 🔑 5 Things That Moved Markets This Week 1 — Bank of Canada Holds at 2.25% The BoC held its benchmark rate steady on Wednesday, June 11 — as widely expected after Canada's May jobs report came in with a blowout 88,000 new pos...

article

Ex-Prosecutor Identifies Game-Changing Testimony in Trump’s Hush Money Trial


In a dramatic turn of events during the trial related to hush money payments, former U.S. Army prosecutor Glenn Kirschner highlighted a piece of testimony that could haunt Donald Trump. The trial centers around allegations that Trump falsified business documents to conceal payments made to porn actor Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

On election night in 2016, attorney Keith Davidson, who represented Stormy Daniels at the time, texted then-National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard with a revealing question: “What have we done?” This message came as it became increasingly apparent that Trump would win the election. The Enquirer had also engaged in a “catch and kill” initiative to bury potentially damaging stories about Trump.

Kirschner described this testimony as “breathtaking” and emphasized that it directly undermines one of Trump’s key defense assertions. Davidson’s acknowledgment of his actions potentially impacting the election result suggests that they recognized the damage caused by their conduct. Moreover, it’s clear that the hush money payments were intended to influence the election, not merely to conceal information from Melania or Trump’s family.

This revelation could have far-reaching consequences for Trump’s criminal responsibility. It challenges the defense’s attempts to distance Trump from any wrongdoing. As the trial unfolds, the impact of this admission remains to be seen.


Comments