I think it's a non-starter. Markets have always hung on the words of politicians and it would be terrible if a president had to police every word in relation to

I think it's a non-starter. Markets have always hung on the words of politicians and it would be terrible if a president had to police every word in relation to that. I think the burden of proof would be that one of his tangents was intended to swing the market in his favor, which would be hard to identify unless he had a huge presence in say, agriculture, before signing a massive subsidy to it.