The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Corruption]
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
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.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

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 sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means 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, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

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.

2018-01-20 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 298 references
[Comments enabled]  

Nor is it just about Cliven Bundy.

The Daily Beast wrote in August 2016 about how this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis. The Beast’s Katie Zavadski wrote: “Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.”

Let me remind you what this is about.  Pamela Geller among others were involved in a Draw the Pedophile "profit" contest.  A clear expression of one's 1st Amendment rights in the United States.

The FBI found out that some jihadis were unhappy about this.  Big shock.  But, in the process of finding that out and allegedly "investigating" they egged on the jihadis in their intent to attack the gathering.

You got that one folks?

Law enforcement encouraged a known jihadi to commit murder and then did not interdict the attack.

Private security stopped it when they opened fire at the checkpoint where private security was checking vehicles.  The FBI was nowhere to be found in interdicting the people they encouraged to commit an act of mass-murder.

Oh, and the Just-US department, which I remind you now is headed by Donald-****-you-*******-Trump, is trying to get the case dismissed, arguing that the US Government is immune from liability even when it breaks the law and encourages people to commit acts of mass-murder.

Well, if the government can do that with impunity then tell me once again why the citizens of this nation should not consider any federal agent or employee to have the intent to murder them, or solicit others to do so, in cold blood as soon as they see them?

Because that's exactly what it appears the FBI in fact did in this case.

Oh, and if that think that's new -- it's not.  What is Waco (or Ruby Ridge) for $100, Alex?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 


2018-01-19 08:19 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 182 references
[Comments enabled]  

What we now know (without details) is that the infamous Section 702, which is otherwise known as "FISA", was massively abused against Americans.

Intelligence-gathering such as Section 702 purportedly authorizes is supposed to be constrained so as not to be able to operate against American citizens in the US.  But it has been abused to do exactly that and Congress just reauthorized it.

Trump will almost-certainly sign the bill, but in light of the abuse now being known if he does he has violated his oath of office and ought to be ejected from it and then charged, along with the rest of Congress.

Folks, there are literally 536 felons sitting in DC right now who have exactly zero respect for our Constitution.  This is just the latest outrage, yet you won't be outraged and indeed I predict you won't even complain -- say much less demand imprisonment -- or more.

More is, in my opinion, justified -- after trial and due process of law, of course.  Yes, the public should be able to read this memo right damn now, but what difference will it make?  Americans have absolutely no sense of outrage when laws intended to protect Americans are abused for political or simple bare naked power purposes; if they did we'd have already had our Second American Revolution and instead here we all are, being screwed daily.  The only thing I hear that allegedly passes for "outrage" is when a few people, like myself for example, refuse to call someone who chops their own dick off "she."

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-01-17 12:27 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 278 references
[Comments enabled]  

"Virtue signalling" and "diversity politics" are nasty things when you get down to the reality of it.

But when applied to places where sensitive activities take place, like, for instance, in the US Capitol, they're suicidal.

So it should be no surprise that the Democrats are doing everything in their power to prevent the result of their idiocy from becoming known widely.

House investigators concluded that Democratic IT aides made unauthorized access to congressional servers in 2016, allegedly accessing the data of members for whom they did not work, logging in as members of Congress themselves, and covering their tracks, according to a presentation summarizing the findings of a four-month internal probe.

Their behavior mirrored a “classic method for insiders to exfiltrate data from an organization,” and they continued even after orders to stop, the briefing materials allege. There are indications that numerous members’ data may have been secretly residing not on their designated servers, but instead aggregated onto one server, according to the briefing and other sources. Authorities said that the entire server was then physically stolen.

Where did it all go?

Probably to Pakistan.

May I remind you that Pakistan is engaged in a cold war of sorts with India and that both sides have nukes?

Who did it?  Almost-certainly Imran Awan and others, all of whom were either hired directly by Democrat members of Congress or were their spouses and others.

Rather than employ Americans to take care of IT needs Democrats imported foreigners and effectively invited persons engaged in espionage into the inner halls of our government.

Of course nobody wants to go after this -- including Trump, by the way, which is one hell of an indictment standing alone.  Can someone tell me why our President doesn't find the likely theft of government data by foreigners who were hired without reason, simply to pass a "virtue signalling" test, an utterly outrageous act for which people should be expelled from office and then indicted, and why is it that everyone involved who isn't a sitting member of Congress is not in the dock right now for what certainly appear to be very serious federal crimes?

Maybe you can come up with a plausible explanation for this other than that Trump is equally guilty through his refusal to run this as far up the ass of the DNC and Democrats in Congress as necessary.

Take your best shot in the comments, if you dare.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-01-16 11:21 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 263 references
[Comments enabled]  

Oh rotten (or, more-likely, mythical) heart of Jesus for not striking the Googleplex with an asteroid...

Google's Arts & Culture app was first launched in 2016, offering "virtual access" to some of the most famous art collections in the world, and many stories about arts and culture from around the world. The latest update of the app, however, makes use of Google's extensive knowledge of machine-learning-based facial recognition, and the front camera of your smartphone, to find your fine art doppelganger... just 'cause.

The new feature lets you record a selfie and receive a list of portrait artworks your self-portrait resembles. While the user interface is extremely simple, Google is using highly sophisticated facial recognition algorithms to compare your facial characteristics to the portraits among the 70,000+ works of art in its Google Art Project database.

Uh huh.  Note that this is not available in many other nations.

Why not in, for example, the EU?

Because the EU now has a data protection law that prohibits retention and abuse of personal information and thus such an "app" unless it protects your private data such as your face, while it has it, and then deletes it, is illegal.

So do you really think this is about the virally-taken up "purpose" allegedly put forward -- to be the "fun source" of comparing your mug to that of portrait artworks?  Google is really going to expend the storage, transmission and compute resources to do this "for you" for no revenue-generating purpose for them whatsoever?

BULL****!

The most-likely and obvious actual purpose to build a facial recognition database of everyone in the country both for Google's and the government's use for whatever the hell they want so that they can sell that to anyone with a camera pointing anywhere, instantly identifying you no matter where you go anywhere in public or, for that matter, in private homes and businesses.

Google claims it won't store or use the photo for any other purpose but what recourse will you have if it is later discovered they're lying?  Let's remember that Google has recently been caught lying when it comes to Android location data; even though you had it shut off they were collecting your location through both visible WiFi networks and cell location data and using it.

Did they face any sanction whatsoever for being caught in that lie?  Did anyone go to prison for lying, or was the company even fined and forced to disgorge any (say much less all) of the value they obtained therein back to the consumers who had their location data collected while they had it explicitly turned off on their phone?

NO.

Everyone involved in that company -- just like the rest of so-called "big tech" -- needs to go to prison -- right now.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-01-11 13:06 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 156 references
[Comments enabled]  

Since the 1990s the Internet sales tax issue has revolved around an older USSC decision known colloquially as Quill.

Quill was a mail-order office products company and states came after them for sales tax in their jurisdictions.  The Supreme Court ruled that absent nexus, that is, a significant connection to the state, the firm had no obligation to collect or remit nor could it be sued as there was no jurisdiction.

Amazon tried this crap for years by putting their warehouse operations under separate "captive" LLCs and similar in an attempt to try to claim they had no nexus.  This slowly collapsed on them as states threatened to sue (suits Amazon knew damn well they'd lose too); the bad news is that there was no retroactive payment and nobody went to jail for what was a pretty-blatant act of tax evasion (which is illegal.)

However, Amazon only did a part of it.  They now compute, collect and remit for items they sell themselves but do not do so for "third party" listings on their site -- which is an ever-increasing percentage of their "retail" business.

Here's the problem: Their argument of not having nexus since they're just "listing" someone else's product is demonstrably false and trivially shown to be so.

Why?

Because the money paid by the customer is forced through Amazon's remittance channels.

Consider the case of a company in Alabama that happens to have product displayed in Florida via some means.  Maybe it's on a computer server in Florida or on a banner, or somewhere else.  Doesn't matter.

If the Alabama business takes the order over the phone and processes it on their own payment system -- that is, neither the money or the product's warehousing and shipment implicate nexus, then the Alabama business can refuse to collect and pay Florida sales tax.  That's what Quill held.

However, if to find, examine and buy the product the money must pass through a firm with Florida nexus then you have nexus and tax is due!  Period.

Well Jeff nozzleface Bezos?

All of these Amazon "marketplace" orders in fact pass directly through Amazon's payment system which is how they deduct their commission and, if they provide fulfillment service then the product passes through Amazon's product handling system too.

Amazon has nexus in essentially every State.

Therefore Amazon has a legal duty to assess, collect and remit sales tax on every sale made on their site no matter whether it's "Shipped and sold by" or is a third-party seller listing because they are not just providing an advertising medium (which would not implicate nexus) for a fee but instead are actually handling the money at minimum (and frequently the packaging and shipping too) and that is the definition of nexus.

This applies to eBAY too if the payment goes through PayPal or other "linked" payment system. Only if none of fulfillment and the handling of the money are not done by eBAY can it claim to be merely an "advertising medium" and thus avoid nexus.

Oh, and Bezos and his ilk need to all go to prison for tax evasion at the same time.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)