The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets
2016-07-09 12:30 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 4256 references

Seriously folks?

You don't understand why The Ticker has faded to black?


Let me start with this: Why do drug dealers shoot each other on street corners?

Answer: Joe the drug dealer cannot call the cops and tell them that Jack the drug dealer ripped him off and sold him a bag of oregano instead of weed.  Joe also can't sue Jack.  Thus, when the threshold of his tolerance is crossed Joe has only the use of direct force available to him because he has no recourse to the law to settle his dispute with Jack.

The FIRST foundation of civil society is The Rule of Law.  Without it there is literally nothing other than the Law of the Jungle, commonly known as "he who has the biggest teeth (or the most guns) and is willing to use them first wins."

Let me remind you that Han Solo, who is widely regarded through the Star Wars series as a heroshot first at Mos Eisley.  George Lucas edited that in the second release of the film (and later had to put it back after fan outrage) but it is a fact that Han shot first in the original theatrical release. Why did Han shoot first and kill Greedo?  Because he knew there was no Rule of Law and he had no recourse to the lawwhich incidentally was later proved to be an exactly correct expectation when he was made an ornament in Jabba's castle.

Now I want you to stop reading, go get an adult beverage or a cup of coffee, and think long and hard before you continue reading about the above.




Did you go get your drink, consume it, and think?

Good -- you may now continue.

This site was founded back in the early part of the financial crisis, spring of 2007 to be exact, because the Rule of Law was being blatantly disregarded -- specifically, with regard to "Prompt Corrective Action" and banks that were paying out dividends with fictitious earnings.

Did anyone go to prison for doing that?  No.

Did anyone go to prison for selling "good investments" to clients that they described in their own internal emails and on recorded internal conference calls as "vomit" and "dog squeeze"?  NO.

Did anyone go to prison for claiming to Congress (and all testimony to Congress is under oath) that they were "adding liquidity" to the system during the meltdown when I found, in public records, that in fact over $60 billion was pulled from the system into the maw of Lehman's collapse?  That facially appears to be perjury, incidentally. The answer is again NO, and one of the people directly responsible (at the time the head of the NY Fed) was actually rewarded for this act (among others) by being appointed to head the Treasury Department (Tim Geithner.)

Did anyone get prosecuted for the felony of perjury in filing literally hundreds of thousands of knowingly false documents in foreclosure actions across the country?  NO.

How many hundreds of thousands of Americans lost jobs and homes as a direct result of this?  How many lives were ruined?  Now ask this: How many people were made whole on the damage they suffered as a result of these acts, all of which were facial violations of the law?



It is broadly illegal to price-fix via any mechanism where market power exists.  So says 15 United States Code, Chapter 1. Go read it.  Virtually the entire US Medical System operates on business models that are facially in violation of that section of law.  The latest outrage is an off-patent device called an "Epipen" used for severe allergic reactions; if you need one and don't have it you have a very good chance of dying.  They cost about $60 10 years ago, and are about $100 today anywhere else in the world.  Except here in the United States -- where they're $400, and if you get on a plane, buy a bunch and bring them back to sell (to make a profit and undercut the price) you go to prison.  The exact same sort of price-fixing with the direct support of the US government and FDA is present in virtually every area of medical practice -- from drugs to devices to hospitals.  All of this facially appears to be illegal; were I to even have had a discussion with a competitor on fixing pricing when I ran my Internet company that would have been a federal offense.

How many people are dead -- broke -- or both as a direct result of these practices?  There is an entire industry that accounts for nearly one dollar in five spent on all items in our economy and it has multiplied its share of spending by a factor of roughly six through the use of these tactics.  You, I and everyone else in the country are being overcharged by a factor of five times as a result, it's destroying the Federal budget and has or will destroy state and local budgets also. You can't run a car repair shop without quoting prices before you start turning wrenches and yet it is essentially impossible to get a price, nor to bind the hospital to any figure they give you, for a procedure before it is done.


What did you see James Comey do in regards to Hillary Clinton and her "private" email server, on which she knowingly stored and transmitted classified information?  The head of the FBI - the nation's top police officer - stood at the podium and described, facially, a felony violation of the law, which I remind you does not require intent, and then said "no prosecutor would bring the case."  Then, one business day later, he sat in Congress and described knowing that a second felony violation of the law, perjury, had taken place in that he admitted he knew she had lied before Congress about 'never' having done so and yet he insisted that he needed a "referral" to "investigate" said act.

If you were being interviewed because the FBI thought you robbed a bank and on your kitchen table was a bale of marijuana do you think they'd need a "referral" to bust you for the weed?  You know damn well the handcuffs would be on you in seconds, so why weren't they on Hillary?

Next, if there was no intent as Comey claimed he could not find why did she lie repeatedly, both to the public and Congress, about the presence of classified information on her server?  You don't lie about something you aren't trying to hide and you don't hide something that doesn't incriminate you!  Prosecutors argue this every single day before juries and get thousands of convictions every year on exactly that basis -- the accused lied about something they did and that lie is evidence that they knew what they were doing was wrong as that's the only reason to lie about it!

Another section of the same law attaches liability to anyone who is involved in these acts and fails to report them.  That facially involves Bill and Chelsea Clinton as well as Hillary's entire senior staff!  This issue is, again, not just limited to Hillary's conduct.  As persons with security clearances (with the possible exception of Chelsea) they all were aware of the law and their positive obligation to immediately report any breach of security of classified information, and failure to do so is a criminal offense.

Finally, contrary to Comey's assertions (which were also a lie, and since they were made to Congress were also Perjury, a felony violation of the law) there indeed are people who not only have been but are being prosecuted for quite-similar violations of the law with regard to classified data.  Specifically there are service members who have been arrested, not just demoted or had their security clearances revoked, for putting classified information on unauthorized devices.  One, Kristian Saucier, faces 20 years in prison; there is no apparent public evidence that this individual ever allowed anyone outside of trusted Navy circles to see the images.  Comey made the blanket statement that the government does not prosecute people who do not give said information intentionally to our enemies; his statement before Congress was a lie.

If you believe this is a singular instance you have your head firmly planted somewhere that the sun never shines.  As yet another example out of literally hundreds I cite the recent shooting at Pulse; 50 people died.  The wife of the shooter has disappeared and the FBI has pointedly refused to answer as to where she is, despite the fact that it has been disclosed that she drove the shooter to the club and knew he was going to do it.  That makes her an accessory just as you or I would be charged with murder if we drove our girlfriend or boyfriend to a bank to rob it and he or she shot dead a teller.  There are now reports circulating that this woman was allowed to flee the country and is in the Middle East where she cannot be extradited nor has she been indicted.  Before you say one more word about how "blue lives matter" you first have to account for and subtract back off the 50 murders that didn't matter when we had someone who we could charge with them that was both alive and able to be arrested, indicted and prosecuted.


If I, as an ordinary person, fire a gun I own every single round that comes out of the barrel until it comes to rest.  Even if I am perfectly justified in drawing and firing that weapon if I shoot an innocent person I remain responsible for the round that did not go where I intended it to and the results of same.  Now contrast this with the police of any stripe, who may fire indiscriminately, emptying weapons containing dozens of rounds even into targets that are facially wrong such as a pair of women in a truck when they are seeking a man in California, and yet they are never held accountable for the damage those rounds do to either person or property.

How many people are dead in Orlando not as a result of a terrorist but rather due to the rounds fired by police, along with their intentional 3+ hour delay in entering the building?  Where are the manslaugher (or felonious assault) charges for the persons who were hit with wildly-sprayed rounds from police weapons during that breach? Why has there been no accounting for those rounds and the persons killed by them?  Why is there never any accounting for said rounds fired by the police wildly and with outrageous disregard for innocent persons in the vicinity?  You or I would be charged immediately for such a flagrant display of gross negligence, likely with multiple felonies.


Now consider all of the above flagrant violations of the law, all of which were observed by many officers of the law of all stripes -- federal, state, county and local.  Exactly how many of said officers made an arrest and processing of said suspects (including other police officers, CEOs or politicians) for behavior they personally witnessed that was (and is) a facial violation of the law, turning over same to a prosecutor?

Effectively zero.


If that's not enough the shooter in Dallas was cornered -- "treed" if you will, isolated in a parking garage from which he could not escape.  Rather than wait him out and arrest him, then go through this entire pesky "due process" thing including a trial and sentence even though he was not presently shooting at anyone the police instead mounted a bomb on a robot and blew him up.  You got that folks?  Yeah, he was obviously guilty as hell but if you catch someone having just killed your daughter and he's cornered in your shed, either out of ammo or choosing not to shoot at that time, you cannot blow the shed up rather than arrest him!  Due process of law?  What's that?  

Boobus Americanus cheered that on too and yet what you just invited the next guy to do is throw a grenade or make damn sure he has a really BIG bomb with him instead of surrendering when cornered! If one person has no right to due process of law THEN NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE -- including the cops.


Folks, all of what has gone on of late is traceable and chargeable to the destruction of The Rule of Law.  The destruction of millions of American's financial status, their wealth, their freedom, their health and frequently their very lives are destroyed because CERTAIN PEOPLE, namely the rich, politically powerful, those wearing a "blue" costume of some sort or those who happen to run big corporations can and do whatever they wish and are simply not prosecuted for violations of the law that you, I, or anyone else would be and are.

When you back a bear into a corner it will attack you because it perceives that as the only remaining course of action that it has available to it other than death.

We created the conditions under which drug dealers resort to shooting each other because we made the consensual act of trade in and consumption of certain substances a crime, and by doing so denied them any other recourse under the law for disputes among themselves.

They are at fault for shooting at one another but it is our responsibility because we intentionally removed their recourse to the law.

We created the conditions under which millions of Americans, most of whom are not drug dealers, believe they have no recourse to the law through our willful and intentional acts and then we sit still, swill beer and post on Facebook when the fact that ordinary Americans have no recourse to the law as soon as someone rich, powerful or wearing a costume who wants to screw them is shoved in our faces instead of demanding that all of this crap stop.  That message - "you have no recourse" - has been driven in day after day as every "important person", cop or company you care to name pulls some stunt that would result in anyone else facing down an immediate felony indictment and walks away laughing or, equally as bad, collects hugs, donuts and, for corporate executives, million dollar bonuses.

Specifically, and in reference to recent events, it is our refusal to demand that police officers be held accountable for every round they fire just as is any other person.

It is our refusal to demand that those in political power who perjure themselves are prosecuted while if you lie you go to prison for obstruction of justice.

It is our refusal to demand that "law enforcement officers" who aid and abet someone who can facially be indicted for multiple counts of murder "disappearing" be held accountable as accessories after the fact and indicted themselves, never mind refusing to demand that our former Attorney General and current President who between them, along with dozens of other "sworn officers", knowingly armed drug dealers also face indictment for their acts.

It is our refusal to demand that the cops who claimed they had video footage of an innocent man shooting and plastered same all over the media when they knew they did not be prosecuted for intentionally causing him to be subjected to death threats and have his reputation destroyed while if he had told the slightest untruth to said cops he would have been charged with obstruction, lying to investigators or both.  Worse, instead of tendering that demand and sticking to it we bring the cops donuts, pay for their lunches and post all sorts of laudatory crap on social media, cheering on the lies!

It is our refusal to demand that an officer who claims to pull over a car for a broken tail-light when both lights are clearly illuminated on the dashcam video and then shoots said motorist be immediately brought up on murder charges and as prime evidence of his guilt we use his intentionally false statement that he was stopping the car for a broken taillight.

It is our refusal to demand that police officers who steal property under so-called "civil forfeiture" when they have no actual offense they can charge the owner with be prosecuted and imprisoned for grand theft and the entire department so-involved dismantled for Racketeering, exactly as you or I would be if we all got together and held people up at gunpoint claiming that they had committed some crime, stealing everything they owned.

It is our refusal to demand that executives in the medical and pharmaceutical industries face the music for conduct that facially appears to violate hundred-year old anti-trust laws that not only mandate a decade long prison sentence for said executives they come with company-ruining fines big enough on a per-count basis to destroy any corporation that pulls this crap.

It is our refusal to demand that all of the "finance professionals" who sold mathematically impossible schemes in the pension and insurance space to teachers, police officers, firemen and others go to prison and have their firms confiscated for promising that which is impossible.

And it is our refusal to hold accountable all in a given role who are aware of this rank corruption, have taken an oath to uphold the law and have violated that oath by either not doing their job directly or sitting silently while others refuse to do so.  It is illegal for a person to be associated with Daesh even if they do not personally commit a terrorist act.  Given that fact why can any member of a police force or other government agency, whether federal, state or local, cover up or refuse to investigate blatantly unlawful behavior without everyone involved in same being charged as co-conspirators when the law clearly defines that someone who acts as an accessory before or after the fact is equally liable.

If this issue -- the utter destruction of The Rule of Law -- is not addressed now there is a very real risk that the spiral of events that has been growing, first slowly and now exponentially, could erupt into literal war within our own nation.

If it does you had better get up and look in the damned mirror because it is the collective inaction and refusal to demand the restoration of the Rule of Law by the American people that has and will lead to this outcome.  There is no violent repression -- by police or anyone else -- that can stop it.  

Only restoring the Rule of Law so everyone has equal recourse to the law will stop and reverse what is otherwise inevitable.

It is for this reason that I have decided that for the present I am going to go enjoy whatever time is left in a reasonably-peaceful society here in America instead of writing for your consumption, for I neither believe that this relatively-peaceful state of affairs will persist for long nor do I believe any material number of people will lift a single finger to do anything about it other than whining on so-called "social media."

Eight years is enough time to see whether or not there is any indication that any material percentage of the public gives a good damn and absent a marked change in the evidence my verdict is in.

Han was not wrong in his assessment of the state of Rule of Law in the Star Wars Universe. We must not, as a society, allow that assessment among people in this nation to continue on the path it is on here in the United States or the outcome will be the same.


The Rule of Law no longer exists in America.

The law is clear.  Knowingly removing classified documents from SIPRNet affiliated devices, which is the only lawful place they can reside or be transmitted on through entire intentional conduct or gross negligence is a criminal offense.

The very setting up of such a server and transmission or reception of classified material violates the statute since it is not possible to accidentally cross the SIPRNet boundary.  It can only be occur through intentional conduct.

Further, there has been zero mention of the Clinton Foundation and what facially appears to have been the selling of favors by the Clintons during and after Hillary's time in office.

Here is the section of US law that Comey admitted and stated that the FBI found Hillary violated:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.


(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

Which in turn implicates Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton and every one of the people who worked on said server or in Hillary's entourage and knew what Hillary was doing.

Note that Comey specifically said Hillary's actions exhibited "great carelessness."  Ordinary carelessness is "negligence" under the law.  Great carelessness is gross negligence under the law; they are equivalent terms!

The Rule of Law was officially burned and buried today on live television by the Director of the FBI.

You therefore no longer have any moral requirement to adhere to same; your entire analysis must now rest on whether you are sufficiently afraid of being shot -- and nothing more.

America, as envisioned and fought for by the founders, died today at 11:00 AM ET, 7/5/2016.

240 years and one day from birth to death.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

EmailGate is very, very bad.

The mere presence of SAP material on her "private" email server is a federal offense -- and should be.  Sometimes described as "above top secret" these programs are no-BS "need to know" and you must be read into each one individually, then you must access whatever material is involved in a secured facility from which that material may not leave.  There is no such thing as "having access to them" on a general basis, no matter who you are.

These programs typically deal with human intelligence of some form -- an agent on the ground in a foreign nation employed in a very sensitive role and operation.  Divulging the material will cause great harm to national security, usually will get people killed outright and might start a war -- literally.  That's not hyperbole -- it's real and is no joke.

That Hillary is reported to have had this material on her server means that at least two serious felonies occurred.  First, the person who caused it to be there committed a serious federal offense, since there is literally no possible way for it to happen without multiple breaches of security protocols to have taken place sequentially, acts that cannot happen by accident.

Second, for Hillary to not immediately report same and deal with the fallout is a second federal offense.

And by the way, if Bill had access to it then he's in trouble too (and he probably did, and is.)

There are people who have a namby-pamby view of the world and who think that programs like this have no place in a civil society.  Well, you're wrong.  Other nations use them and we both do and have since our founding.  The modern structure around them is (relatively) new but not this sort of program itself.  Their presence and operations often save lives, sometimes hundreds or thousands of lives.  They're important, but if you wish to argue the propriety of the programs themselves then go ahead and initiate that debate -- but in the meantime recognize that crapping all over them as they exist today may well get someone killed or even that a war might be initiated that leads to cities getting nuked -- and that the someone who that happens to might be or include you.

Nonetheless this is not the most-serious aspect of the Emailgate scandal.  No, it's far worse folks -- it's the Clinton Foundation linkage.

There is already plenty of evidence in the public that the Clinton Foundation basically sold access to information and even secrets themselves to persons in other nations for "donations", and this is not something that happened without the knowledge of literally hundreds of people in our government, including at the highest levels, all of whom had a legal and national duty to prevent and report it.

That we have a candidate for President who was not only deeply involved in this she was the architect and chief steering agent for it is beyond outrageous.  There are plenty of people who believe that Obama has basically sold out America to various foreign interests, including the Muslim Brotherhood.  What Hillary appears to have been involved in is not only far worse it's far more-pervasive.

We shall see what the FBI and related agencies come up with here.  We then shall see what Loretta Lynch does in response.  I have often commented during this process that the mere presence of classified material on her "home grown" email server on its own is sufficient to bar her from running for President and ought to land her in prison, because it both is and should.

But that merely scratches the surface.

Remember that this pattern of conduct -- selling off American secrets for money by the Clintons -- is neither new or particularly surprising given Hillary and Bill Clinton's history.  In 1996 Chinagate involved the transfer of satellite technology usable for the development of military purposes, including nuclear missiles, to China and millions of dollars of donations to the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign by persons barred from donation because they were not Americans.

Judicial Watch went after this and ultimately prevailed; they not only prevailed they were awarded nearly a million dollars in attorneys fees and costs.  Clinton administration officials destroyed records during this investigation as well in an attempt to prevent discovery and lied under oath.

In addition Yah Lin Trie pled guilty to violating campaign finance rules (which prohibit non-US sources or persons of funds for said donations or structuring to evade said rules) and over 100 other people either took the 5th or fled the country to avoid prosecution.

And let's not forget Marc Rich, who Clinton pardoned after he and his wife donated over a million dollars to the Clinton Presidential Library and campaigns combined.  He subsequently fled the country to avoid being imprisoned for tax evasion and died in 2013 -- in Switzerland, having successfully avoided punishment.

Whatever you may think of Democrats generally and Hillary personally the premise that laws intended to protect not only the integrity of this nation but our military secrets are something that can be bought and sold by persons for their own personal political and financial interests is something you must reject using whatever means are available -- and necessary.

Hillary is facially disqualified by the laws of the United States from being President, or for that matter, holding any office in our government.

That we continue to allow someone who is tantamount to Senator Palpatine to continue with this charade is an outrage.  If it continues, and leads to her election, it very well may destroy our nation.

Hillary Clinton, along with the rest of her cabal, must face indictment and prosecution -- not election.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

This is awful.

Approximately 71% of the 34 million 17-to-24-year-olds in the U.S. would not qualify for military service because of reasons related to health, physical appearance and educational background, according to the Pentagon.

The ineligible typically includes those who are obese, those who lack a high school diploma or a GED, convicted felons, those taking prescription drugs for ADHD and those with certain tattoos and ear gauges, the Wall Street Journal reports, though some requirements can be waived.

It's actually worse than that; note that these statistics only refer to reported medication and issues related to it, such as ADHD meds.

What I have noted as an extremely alarming trend is the radical increase in extremely "fragile" young people when it comes to emotional stability.  I'm talking about people who do not get through a single week without at least one near-heart-attack style panic attack, those who have had to leave a retail sales floor because they were "triggered" and literally couldn't complete a basic function (like helping someone find a pair of shoes!) and similar.

Now add to this obesity and physical un-fitness (which I remind you accounts for one in three young adults!) and you've got a recipe for disaster.

We, as Americans, have created this among our youth.  We did it starting with kids as toddlers when we refused to let kids run or play outside -- indeed, we refuse to let them do anything unstructured at all other than stick their heads in an iPhone.  We've even allowed "social services" to go after parents who allow their kids to walk to a park "unattended" a few blocks from their house and threaten them with the removal kidnapping of their children and prosecution should they allow it again!  We continue it in Elementary schools when we allow the handing out of "awards" to everyone for "exceptionalism" (by definition such is impossible), by taking away the rigors of failure and the punishment that naturally flows from it (whether externally inflicted or not) and by refusing to call behaviors, acts and emotions by their proper names, encouraging the good ones and allowing the consequences of the bad to flow through.  The defense of "microaggression" as a "problem" that rests with the person allegedly committing them instead of the fragile snowflake who can't handle someone mentioning a color, sex or comment on their hair without losing their emotional stability is a huge part -- but by no means all -- of this.  This garbage has even infested our colleges; indeed, if anything it's more-prevalent there than in our High Schools!

The result has been a literal explosion of young "adults" who are in fact infants in terms of their ability to handle the ordinary daily insults of life that cross everyone's path from time to time.

The responsibility for this is as much ours as it is with those young "adults" -- because we not only allowed this sort of thing to happen we encouraged it, cheered it on and even demanded that it happen!

Becoming an adult means being willing and able to accept that nobody is in fact created equal.  Equality of rights is not equality of result nor equality of one's person; in point of fact every person on the planet is in some way unique, and unless you're an identical twin you're genetically unique as well.

This means that where one person will struggle you will not.  Where you will struggle someone else will not.  Neither of those struggles gives license to either of you to melt down and lose your mind, temporarily or otherwise and if you do melt down then the consequence of doing so, whether it be loss of a job, expulsion or whatever is how you learn or perish; the latter, and the fact that those who did deal with it survived while those who didn't died is why we, as a species, are here.

Life is a struggle; if you do not struggle to some extent you will certainly die, and you deserve to!

You probably just revolted in horror if you're one of those "snowflakes" at the above sentence but it is absolutely true and always has been since the dawn of time.  You must expend energy, that is, struggle, to lift food and water to your mouth and to make it to the bathroom for the basic hygienic needs of humans; if you fail at either of those essential set of tasks you die.

Without struggle and challenge there is no progress.  Not only can we not progress as a world, a nation, or as an individual we cannot survive without struggle!

You cannot learn without seeking to expand that which you already know, and to do that you must effort -- that is, struggle.  You have no right to the food and water that go down your throat nor the flush toilet and shower that takes away your bodily waste, never mind the electrical power that gives you refrigeration for your food, heat and (perhaps) air conditioning.  To acquire the electricity you must effort in some way; the most-basic is to hook a generator to a bicycle and pedal, but you'll find quickly that you can't run your refrigerator doing that, say much less the rest of your residence.

Your residence itself didn't magically come into being either, and absent continual energy input it will degrade over time into dust.

All of technology of today exists because many people struggled.  The pipe full of water to your house, the wire carrying electricity, the asphalt or metal roof that keeps water off your head at night, the walls that keep critters (including ones that would eat you!) out and your much-vaunted "service animal" in, your computer, the Internet, roads, cars, boats, buses, trains and everything they move from place to place -- all exist because of struggle.  As the planet's population expands on a finite rock the struggles must continue since we must advance technology and efficiency or the rock we call Earth will fail to provide what we need -- and many, if not most, will die.

If the basic part of our military cannot accept 7 out of 10 young people from 17-24 what role do those very same people have in our economy and the future of our nation?  If 70% of our youth are unable to perform a push-up, are emotionally unstable to the point of not being able to interact with others or do a basic job on a reliable basis, commit felonies for fun or have decided to tattoo racist messages all over their lower arms and face how is our nation ever going to economically survive and prosper, say much less defend itself should the need arise?

Folks, this is all of our fault collectively as a nation and there is utterly no sign that we're going to change it on a grand scale either. That readers of this blog have kids who (for the most part) don't fit this paradigm and either have jobs or educational goals and achievements to match doesn't matter -- we still elect and allow to serve politicians that pander to this crap and permit it to continue on not only a micro scale in our local communities and counties but a on grand scale nationally.

You may argue that it's "inhumane" or "wrong" to simply say "throw people to the wolves and let them starve" but at exactly what point is that the only rational act remaining?  At what point do you tell people that either they cut the crap, grow a pair, stop melting down like a 2 year old and deal with their inner (and outer) demons -- even though you know full well that it's hard and does and will suck?

See, if we don't do that the least of our problems is going to be an invasion or foreign military event that goes bad and we'll find that we're not able to cover it.  No, the real harm comes right here at home, where employers can't find people who simply can show up for work and do their job without losing it in the course of a common day.

I saw a bit of this back in the 90s when I ran MCSNet, but these days its utterly rampant and is no longer an exception -- it is, unfortunately, the rule among our younger population.

We had better change that, starting right now.

This day cannot be renamed "Dependence Day" without catastrophic consequences.

Don't let it happen America.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

2016-07-03 11:29 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 409 references

I tire of lying politicians.

You're right.

But, I charge, Trump does not actually support those words.

In fact LYING DONALD has specifically said he supports infringements on the right to keep and bear arms!


In a bar as an ordinary patron, for one thing.

Or for a person on a "watch list" that has not been charged with any sort of crime, for another.

The Second Amendment is indeed clear with four little words: SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Is there a clear exception to one's Constitutional Rights?  Sure: If you are under an active and unsealed indictment, that is, you're actively being prosecuted for a crime, or post-conviction for same during the period of your sentence (whether by incarceration, probation or parole) your constitutional rights can be infringed.  However, even if you've been convicted at the end of said supervision by the court system said disabilities must also end.  This is not only a requirement of our Constitution it is a founding principle of our justice system that pre-dates the Constitution!

None of us would tolerate a law that said that (whether we had previously been convicted of a crime or not) you must wear a ball gag when leaving our home unless we had first taken a government-sponsored course and had a license from the state to speak, nor would we tolerate a law that said you could only buy a 33.6kb modem Internet connection or a printing press that was only capable of emitting a certain number of pieces of paper per minute.  After all the founders had only hand-cranked and hand-written means of communication; there were no machine-driven printing presses, no telegraphs, no telephones and certainly no Internet!

Yet that sort of constraint is exactly what some 50,000 gun laws and regulations do at the federal level alone, say much less state and local laws and regulations, starting with the National Firearms Act, Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Brady Law.

All of which, along with the rest, are blatantly unconstitutional.

So Mr. Trump, you are either a liar or you must both demand that all of these be immediately repealed and state that if elected you will either refuse to enforce flatly-unconstitutional laws and/or pardon anyone and everyone that is "convicted" under same on a blanket basis, rending said laws null and void of effect.

The latter would effectively restore the 2nd Amendment since a pardoned person is exactly identical in legal standing to one who has never committed an offense.

While there is plenty of disagreement on whether the Executive can use "prosecutorial discretion" to refuse to enforce a law that it believes is unconstitutional there is no such disagreement on the pardon power; that power is absolute with the only redress available to Congress or anyone else being the political process of impeachment.



View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
The Rule Of Law

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.