The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Corruption]

Oh this is rich..... it appears that a gun "walked" in Fast-n-Furious was used in the Garland Texas assault on the cartoon contest..... and the Fibbies are trying to bury the lede.

Five years before he was shot to death in the failed terrorist attack in Garland, Texas, Nadir Soofi walked into a suburban Phoenix gun shop to buy a 9-millimeter pistol.

At the time, Lone Wolf Trading Co. was known among gun smugglers for selling illegal firearms. And with Soofi's history of misdemeanor drug and assault charges, there was a chance his purchase might raise red flags in the federal screening process.

While a misdemeanor conviction won't (generally; there are exceptions) disqualify you from buying a gun lying on the form, if detected, will.  It appears that said lying was detected and a hold issued originally (to allow investigation) but was released a day later.

While this (now dead) attempted (and poor excuse for a) terrorist is now dead and he failed to manage to kill anyone else with his weapon, the fact remains that there have still been no federal prosecutions of the people responsible for Fast-N-Furious, including Eric (Place)Holder.

There is no longer a "rule of law" when anyone with a sufficient degree of political influence can simply ignore said law. Instead what you have is, quite effectively, this:

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

You still want her to be the Democrat nominee eh?

Donations to the Clinton Foundation by Swiss bank UBS increased tenfold after Hillary Clinton intervened to settle a dispute with the IRS early in her tenure as secretary of state, according to a published report.

According to the Wall Street Journal, total donations by UBS to the foundation grew from less than $60,000 at the end of 2008 to approximately $600,000 by the end of 2014. The Journal reports that the bank also lent $32 million through entrepreneurship and inner-city loan programs it launched in association with the foundation, while paying former President Bill Clinton $1.5 million to participate in a series of corporate question-and-answer sessions with UBS Chief Executive Bob McCann.

Ah, so you think you're a "progressive" and electing Hillary will somehow help the "poor" and alleviate all the screwing that the financial industry does to people who are "not rich" - right?

Uh, you might want to rethink that and stop fawning over people who have a decades-long history of being all cozy-like with those very same folks who have been screwing you blind.

PS: This particular "issue" related to UBS hiding the identities of very rich people who were not, it was alleged, paying their taxes..... ain't that convenient that she'd intervene and her "family foundation" would be so-richly rewarded?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

2015-07-29 08:15 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 126 references

Of course you know the truth on this -- Democrat or Republican, they're both ball-less and don't give a damn about one of "their own" violating the law.

A reported two-month gap in emails from Hillary Clinton's private account during 2012 coincides with a period of escalating violence in Libya and the obtaining of a special exemption by her top aide, Huma Abedin, to work for both the State Department and the Clinton Foundation.

The Daily Beast reported late Tuesday that no emails between Clinton and her State Department staff for the months of May and June 2012 are among the estimated 2,000 messages that have been released from the Democratic presidential frontrunner's account.

So either Hillary sent no work-related emails during that time or she's violated Federal Law in at least one and probably several different ways (obstruction of justice, for openers.)

Pick one, but either way this is prima-facie evidence that Hillary has committed a federal offense and for any "ordinary" person would be more than sufficient to secure an indictment.

Where is it?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Some people think this sort of event is something "new" or "novel." It is not.

If you talk to the reporters who work for various big media companies, they insist that they have true editorial independence from the business side of their companies. They insist that the news coverage isn't designed to reflect the business interests of their owners. Of course, most people have always suspected this was bull**** -- and you could see evidence of this in things like the fact that the big TV networks refused to cover the SOPA protests. But -- until now -- there's never necessarily been a smoking gun with evidence of how such business interests influences the editorial side.

Of course they make such a claim because if this is not true then these "media companies" are literally without anything of value to sell.

But the truth is that the media has always had its "reporting" influenced by the "business interest" side.  Why would anyone believe otherwise?  Media exists on the spending of advertising, and advertisers are not interested in seeing their products and services slammed -- or, for that matter, any story that might lead to fewer sales.

But let's think about what this means for you as a media consumer, particularly if you think you're consuming "hard news."  Are you, or are you being fed propaganda?

Oh, probably the second -- most of the time.

The implications of coordination at the level being allegedly reported here, however, go far beyond simply "paying attention to" the firms that are placing ads in a given media property.  This allegation is one of direct and, arguably, corrupt coordinated actions between a Mississippi Attorney General, motion picture studios and the MPAA.

How far does this rabbit hole reach?  Probably to the earth's core.

Now consider just a few other "stories", such as the near-constant attacks on companies like BlackBerry.  Is it really about their handsets being in some way "inferior" or is it that the company doesn't take all your data and sell it to the various media properties, and if you remove them from the market you enhanced your collection of that data?  Likewise, how about cholesterol and other medical matters, when firms are making literal billions on their pharmaceutical products and running ads in the media for them.  Name an industry and you can find an example and if you have a smoking gun in one what leads you to believe that it's not present literally everywhere?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Here's yet another exhibit of the many that shows why I believe we're utterly doomed unless there is a mass-awakening of the American people.

DETROIT (AP) — Like most Americans, the drivers of Detroit are required to carry auto insurance whenever they get behind the wheel, but many law-abiding residents can't afford the Motor City's highest-in-the-nation auto premiums, which top $5,000 a year in some neighborhoods.

So fully half of Detroit drivers do what's known locally as "driving dirty" — taking to the streets without any coverage. It's practically a tradition here.

Now Mayor Mike Duggan is trying to do something about the high insurance costs based on concerns that they are deterring new residents and investment from coming to Detroit as it rebuilds after emerging from bankruptcy last year.

The chief reason for the high rates: Michigan is the only state that requires auto insurance policies to come with unlimited lifetime personal-injury protection, meaning that people who are hurt in car crashes get 100 percent of their medical expenses covered, sometimes for years or even decades. The protection applies regardless of who was at fault.

The law also allows care providers to charge much more for treatment of auto injuries.

"Every doctor in every hospital in this state understands ... that if you schedule an MRI for a rehab case for somebody who fell off a ladder and has Blue Cross, you get paid a certain amount," Duggan said. "If that person got hurt in a car accident, you get reimbursed triple."

The State of Michigan mandated outright price-fixing and didn't get instantly sued and prosecuted by the Federal Government for violations of the Sherman and Clayton acts despite the fact that 15 USC is clear and says anyone that creates a collusive scheme to fix prices has committed a federal felony.

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

As the US Supreme Court has held all the way back to Wickard .v. Filburn you don't actually have to engage in interstate commerce for this to apply; your acts merely need to have some plausible effect on same.  Wickard was about a farmer who grew a crop for his own personal consumption and was found to "effect interstate commerce" because he then wouldn't have to buy that material on the market from a potential out-of-state supplier.  The same applies here; this outrageous act of price-fixing clearly has nexus to Interstate Commerce as you can't spend the money stolen in this fashion on things made outside of Michigan.

The Mayor of Detroit, instead of bringing that prosecution and suing every single hospital, medical provider and insurance company under this scheme instead wants to "pass a law" to "bring relief" -- but only for those in Detroit!

And by the way, this isn't local to Detroit.  I have relatives in Michigan and the entire state is like this.  I am quite-literally aghast at what is being charged for auto insurance there for someone who just needs liability coverage -- they have an older car that really isn't worth all that much, and if it gets destroyed they'll just go buy another one (that happens quickly in the land of salt, incidentally.)

At the Detroit Medical Center, Chief Administration Officer Conrad Mallett said limiting medical care for people who suffer catastrophic injuries is not "a path to lower auto rates in Detroit or anywhere in Michigan."

This man ought to be under federal indictment for participating in a price-fixing scheme.  Why isn't he?

More the point why isn't every resident of Michigan, all of whom are being robbed by this crap, not in Lansing surrounding the State Capitol and demanding that everyone involved in this scam be arrested right now?

Here's the thing folks -- if you won't get off your own ass and act when there is clear legal leverage to do so and the law makes what's going on quite-clearly unlawful and thus you have a peaceful means of redress that involves simply demanding that the government enforce said law, backing that demand up via peaceful means including boycotts, demonstrations, embargoing the Capitol and demonstrations outside not only the Capitol but also the homes and businesses of lawmakers and companies involved why should anyone else who is not presently being screwed by the same thing give a damn about that which you quite-obviously consent to?

Driving without insurance is usually a secondary offense discovered when a motorist is stopped for another violation or involved in an accident. Penalties in Detroit can include fines of almost $700 and a suspended license.

So Michigan doesn't data-share and pull your license and tags if you drop insurance or don't have it?  Or maybe they do, and the State just loves the fines it gets to assess against people who can't afford to pay.

Note the numbers here folks -- $5,100 a year for coverage on a vehicle in a zip code where the median household income is $29,000.  How the hell do you pay that?  You can't.


View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
Why I Find It Hard To Give A F**k

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.