> Rather than claim a straw man, think about what they do and how it interacts with the administration. Uh, essentially betting against a policy your former he

> Rather than claim a straw man, think about what they do and how it interacts with the administration. Uh, essentially betting against a policy your former head put in place isn't a typical thing? You would absolutely steer clear of this. There's plenty of other things they could be doing, no? Just to make the point. This is such a typical thing investment banks do, that (especially) they are the ones doing it and nobody else?