The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Editorial]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection(s):
There Can Be NO Compromise On Data

Display list of topics

Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog Buy Sarah's Pictures
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.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2018-09-17 06:25 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 1101 references
[Comments enabled]  

Ah, so now we have it...

Ford, a 51-year-old registered Democrat who has published in academic journals and has trained students in clinical psychology, described the alleged incident in The Washington Post on Sunday, saying it occurred during a summer day in the 1980s at a Maryland house where teens had gathered. Ford claimed she headed upstairs to a bathroom when she was suddenly pushed onto a bed, as rock-and-roll music blared.

However, Ford told The Post she did not recall exactly who owned the house, how she came to be at the house, or how the gathering was arranged. She remembered only that the house was in Montgomery County, near a country club, and that parents were not present.

So she doesn't know who's house it was, why she was there, what the "gathering" was about (gee, I wonder.)

Now let's deal with FeinSwine first.  If, and I stress if, this accusation is truthful Feinswine should be drawn and quartered for sitting on it for two months.  In fact such is misprision of a felony, a crime itself, and for that the prime bitch employing alleged Chinese spies should go to prison -- right now.

But back to the claimed accusation.

There are several possibilities:

1. She was assaulted, and by Kavanaugh.  In other words, her account is accurate.

2. She was not assaulted; the "playing around" was sexual, was consensual at some point, she stopped consenting and so did the sexual escapades while her clothes were still on.  But now, being a hard-left "professor", an avowed activist who has attempted to conceal that fact by sanitizing her social media (gee, why, if it's not material?) she suddenly changes her mind about kissing a boy and playing "grinder" with him 35 years later.

3. She was assaulted but it was not Kavanaugh and 35 years later he's convenient to attack because she hates him and his political stance; 35 years prior he was perhaps somewhere within 10 or 20 miles at the time and he can't prove otherwise.

4. There was a party, she was (perhaps) drinking, others were (probably) drinking, everyone had fun and went home, but she was bent about words exchanged or being jilted and turned it into "assaulted" over the space of 35 years.  Think that doesn't happen?  Yes it does, and it sometimes doesn't take 35 years either; who remembers the Duke LaCrosse team accused by a stripper of gang-rape that, by all evidence, never happened at all?  Or shall we discuss Tawana Brawley?

Note that none of those means you fail a polygraph, by the way -- especially if you have months to study for it and practice -- and are trained in psychological responses.  Nor do we have the questions and the raw data.  So the value of said "event" (the polygraph) is zero.  The best polygraphs are not infallible -- and when taken by the interested party with a hand-picked examiner and questions are in fact worthless.

The other person accused of being there denies that anything of that sort ever happened at all.  In other words, not 1 or 2.  Either 3, 4, or it was made up entirely.

Now add into the mix this: The alleged "victim" has more animus and thus reason to lie as a consequence of her political orientation and advocacy than did the Duke LaCrosse stripper.  That may have simply been a matter of not getting a "respectful enough" tip for her dancing gig.

Finally, it appears she told nobody at the time -- not even her best (female) friend.  How many women tell nobody about an incomplete assault like this -- or any other incident when they have a bad time at a party?  None.  Ever.  Unless they have no friends.  But I'll assume she did, and like every other young woman of that time and the current time, told her bestie(s) everything.  Especially something like this.  If it happened, that is.

If you need more, there is more -- while she apparently spoke of being attacked in her "late teen years" twice in therapy, once in 2012 in marriage counseling and again (to apparently someone different and in individual therapy) in 2013 in neither of these cases did she name Kavanaugh.  In general clinical psychologists keep pretty good notes -- that's part of their job.  And then there are the internal inconsistencies; 15 is not "late teens", for example.

And for the final bit of eyebrow-raising, in what has to be the most-amazing and bizarre coincidence ever, there are reports that Kavanaugh's mother, who is also a Judge, was the judge who heard a foreclosure case on the accuser's parents. What are the odds that this is mere coincidence and not part of animus this woman has toward Kavanaugh personally to motivate a slanderous smear?  Ed: I've read the filing -- it doesn't support the claim.  Kept here for those who want to continue to make this a part of the debate.

Sexual assault is serious whether incomplete and attempted or completed sexual assault.  But there's no evidence to back up this claim, there's no pattern of behavior, there are dozens of women who have known Kavanaugh since High School and have said nothing of that sort was ever perpetrated by him to their knowledge or with or against them and the accuser lacks any ability to provide any sort of evidence at all nor can she even tell anyone why she was at the alleged location, how it was organized, it's purpose or what she was doing before and during the event in question despite wearing a one-piece bathing suit under street clothes -- and she claims he allegedly tried to remove the suit first (what?)

Oh, and both the accuser and Feinswine are known to want to derail Kavanaugh by any means possible -- Feinswine has specifically so-stated, yet she sat on the very thing that could have done so for two months.  This implies that she knows the claim is false because otherwise she would have been best served in her interests, which she has publicly stated, by immediately both releasing it and forcing an investigation -- in July.

I call bull**** and believe Feinswine sat on this allegation for two months because she did investigate it, knows it's a lie and also knows that if she played the card in July she would have gotten caught and not only would Kavanaugh be confirmed the consequences would be potentially fatal to the Demoncrat party.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-09-14 08:04 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 216 references
[Comments enabled]  

And here we go again...

“When it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth’s systems to produce disasters,” the editorial board wrote.

Meh.

Jeff Bezos goes on to blame Trump for his "complicity" because, as they claim, Florence is "more serious" and "more intense" due to Trump's environmental policies.

Yeah, ok.

First, the allegedly-gonna-wipe-you-off-the-map Cat 5 (briefly) storm has now landfalled as..... a Cat 1 hurricane.

Don't get me wrong -- a Cat 1 hurricane is plenty bad to ruin your day.  But the catttttasssstrooopppheeeee from wind is simply absent.  I had a suspicion this was going to be the case; maintaining Cat 4 or 5 strength is a matter of everything turning out just right for the storm, and it just takes a bit of vertical shear to screw it up.

Second, and WaPo knew this if they bothered to look (they didn't) sea surface temperatures over the path the storm took were in fact almost-exactly normal for this time of year.  There was no "warming", in other words, that made this storm particularly intense or out of the ordinary.

Third, if anything "more intense" atmospherics would tend to weaken said storms and make them move faster, both of which make for less damaging outcomes, not more-so.  Shear weakens hurricanes (as it did in this case) and the worst impacts are not always from the winds and surge, but rather from inland flooding that is produced as a result of a stalled storm that rains on you for days -- as occurred in Houston and appears to be on tap here.  The more "intense" the weather pattern the less-likely you get a collapse of said pattern and upper lever winds and weather (e.g. troughs, a ridge that blocks movement, etc) that result in a stalled storm -- and thus catastrophic rains.

This is what CNBS just put up on their screen for the "catastrophic" storm making landfall right now.

 

I doubt they looked at the video they were displaying before they did; that doesn't even look like a moderately nasty sea state.  Hell, we get far worse out of a Tropical Storm around here say much less any sort of hurricane -- and I've ridden out several.

When does the "fake news" lies stop and when do we, as people in this country, simply dismiss or even more-importantly destroy through lawful economic action those so-called "media outlets" who intentionally lie about serious, even life-threatening events like hurricanes?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-09-11 08:49 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 153 references
[Comments enabled]  

This one's simple.

The Dallas Morning News reports that community activists organized the rally Monday to protest last week’s shooting of 26-year-old Botham Jean. Officer Amber Guyger was arrested Sunday on a manslaughter charge and released on bond.

An arrest affidavit that gives a narrative of what happened was released Monday. It appeared to be based almost entirely on the officer’s account.

She allegedly parked on the "wrong floor", stuck her key in the lock and found the door open, entered the apartment believing it was hers, found a man standing inside, gave verbal commands that he ignored and then shot him.

It was his apartment and she was a pig.

Legally, this was a home invasion.  She entered his home without permission or lawful reason.  She failed to look at the apartment number on the door before doing so.  She failed to detect that her key did not turn in the lock.

She gave commands to someone who not only had no reason to listen to her he had every reason and legal justification to shoot her where she stood and instead, when he didn't do what he should have done on the spot she shot and killed him.

The act was not premeditated but she fired knowing it was likely to kill and did so with gross negligence and reckless disregard at the level of depravity for her exact location and the fact that she was not in her own home.

BY HER OWN STATEMENT AND ADMISSION that's Murder 2 -- period, end of discussion, full-stop.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-09-11 08:33 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 143 references
[Comments enabled]  

This morning, 17 years ago, I woke up, flipped on the TV, and saw... a burning high-rise.

Like most people my initial impression was that we had just seen a horrible accident.  A plane crash of the sort that people had thought about, but just accepted as an unavoidable risk associated with aviation.

Then I, and millions of others, watched the second plane fly into the tower -- at full speed, and clearly deliberately piloted.

My reaction was instantaneous as was that of millions of others: That's terrorism.

Today, we still won't call it by it's full name: Islamic terrorism.

Today, we still have refused to hold to account those who allowed various Saudi nationals to leave our nation by private, chartered aircraft while our airspace was closed to all non-military traffic.  Those persons, who we had reason to believe were connected to the funding and logistics involved in this attack and their nation, have never been held to account, nor have the people in our government involved in same -- including Robert Mueller.

Today, we still have not held Jeb Bush's Florida DMV -- or Jeb himself -- accountable for issuing Florida Driver Licenses to terrorists.  I remind you that these were the very IDs used to board the planes, without them the attacks were impossible, and they were issued to people who were not citizens or lawful permanent residents.  We even let Jeb Bush run for President without answering for this outrage.

Today, we still have not done a single material thing about the fact that there is a large group within the Muslim faith that believe their religious code trumps secular law and they are commanded to impose it on any nation in which they live by God.

They believe that any person who does not submit to said code must be destroyed -- not shunned, not ignored, murdered.

They believe that the only options are to convert, to pay jizya, permanent tax (a "capitation", in taxation terms, an annual levy) on all non-Muslims by Muslims, or to die.

They believe that women are responsible for the sexual urges of men and have no rights of independence, and thus must cover themselves so as to not "excite" a man whenever outside their home and in fact may not travel anywhere, even to the store for food, without the permission or even direct presence of "their" guardian, who is either their husband, brother or other man -- as he directs.

They believe that any woman who refuses to so consent, said person being by definition an "infidel" or "apostate" for their failure to voluntarily submit to Muslim teachings on same and is mocked, assaulted or raped deserves what happens as a result of her refusal to behave with "appropriate modesty" and avoid "inflaming" the sexual passions of the man or men who assault her.

They believe that women may not enter the same door, nor use the same place, to worship as men.  There were Americans who believed that black people could not do so too; there were "colored" movie theater entrances and seating areas, bathrooms and similar.  Islam teaches and these people believe this applies to women in the present day and they enforce it.

In fact they believe that the sub-standard status of women extends to childhood and revere their alleged "Prophet" who at almost 50 years of age took a bride aged six or seven, and who consummated said marriage when she was ten. (probably because he knew he'd kill her if he tried it before then.)  There is not one Muslim I have ever encountered who will call this what it was and is: Sexual predation, pedophilia, outrageous, disgusting and worthy of life in prison with your nuts cut off and fed to the prison cat.

Indeed on so-called "social media" today if you merely bring up this fact -- that the so-called "prophet" is considered by any rational, modern individual as a pedophile and child abusing monster you are risking having your account banned.  In other words Twatter, Facesucker and others all promote pedophilia in the name of religion by refusing to allow anyone on their platforms to call it what it is under the claim that such is "hate speech."

These are the people who blew up two civilian buildings, committed an act of war by attacking our Pentagon and tried to attack the US Capitol, but failed due to the actions of the people on board the latter aircraft who died in preventing the last aircraft from reaching its target.

It is certainly true that not all Muslims adhere to this set of beliefs in their own minds but I challenge you to find any who will state out loud or raise hell within their local mosque and demand that all mention of the pedophile prophet be stricken because their alleged "prophet" was a child molesting monster, nor have I ever seen one Muslim make such a statement in public or on Television.

I further dare you to find any Muslim, anywhere, who will state in a loud, clear voice that their religious beliefs are subservient to secular law, has no standing superior to same, that their alleged holy text commanding same is in error and never will they seek to impose same by co-opting, taking over or overthrowing secular government.

The Catholic Church is finally being forced to deal with the abuse of boys and young men by Priests but I've yet to find any evidence in the text of the Bible that Jesus, or any of the apostles, took a child as a spouse and had sex with her at the age of 10.

When do the people of this world who like their buildings standing up and their people alive hold Muslims to the same standard of decency that we apply to everyone else?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

Serena Williams, like so many people today, wishes to complain about "discrimination" related to voluntary conduct she engaged in and for which nobody but herself was responsible.

After a controversial call by the U.S. Open chair umpire during Saturday's women's title match, Serena Williams asserted that tennis has different standards for men and women.

Williams, 36, on Saturday suffered a swift 6-2, 6-4 loss to Naomi Osaka, who became the tournament's first female Japanese champion.

It happened after Williams, a 23-time Grand Slam singles champion, appeared to be thrown off her game -- after being penalized in the second set because of three separate game violations. 

Screw you Serena.

First, your coach later admitted that he provided coaching during the match, which the chair umpire saw and flagged.  That is a legitimate violation of the rules and thus the original penalty was legitimate.

Williams’ coach, Patrick Mouratoglou, later admitted to an ESPN reporter that “I was coaching.”

That's prohibited in the rules.  Whether or not everyone gets caught and thus penalized by it is immaterial.  Serena was caught, was penalized for the actions of her coach (since she's the responsible party for what people she hires do while on the court), and then she melted down and displayed unsportsmanlike conduct in smashing her racket and verbally abusing the umpire, continuing her abuse after the first two penalties!

Billie Jean King, of course, came to her defense and claimed that as an "emotional" woman she should be able to verbally abuse the officials.  What?

First off, the complaint raised by some that it's "wrong" to penalize the player for the actions of the coach is flat-out crap on its face.  Unlike team sports such as baseball or soccer in individual sports like tennis the player hires the coach and thus has agency liability for their actions.  That the rules of tennis hold the player liable for the actions of the coach on-court is not only reasonable it's the only proper relationship that could be in the rules.  This is similar to golf where the golfer hires the caddy; if the caddy commits some violation of the rules while on the course the player is held responsible -- and should be.

It is a fact that not all violations of the rules of a sporting contest are seen or caught.  If you've ever watched any professional sporting contest (or for that matter any at any level) you've seen instances where someone has violated a rule of the game and yet it went unseen and unpunished by the officials.  By the very nature of an officiated game there will be inequities as a result of this; the point of having officials is to reduce them since the competitors have no incentive to flag their own violations, assuming they're even consciously aware of them.

I've seen plenty of people sanctioned and even ejected from games for unsportsmanlike conduct.  So have you, I'm sure.  Whether it's a red card in soccer or the baseball player or manager who gets in the face of the umpire and gets tossed out, it happens.

It should happen.

And when it does happen, it's not "sexism", and to claim otherwise marks you as nothing more than a douchebag entitled piece of crap.

Serena Williams has permanently destroyed any respect I had for her.  I used to consider her an extraordinary talented sportswoman in the game of tennis.

Now she's just a piece of crap who thinks that she's entitled by virtue of her sex (and probably race) to become abusive any time a call she disagrees with is made by the umpire or line judge.

Screw that crap; get out Serena and stay out.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)