The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets

Ed: I hesitated to write on this topic, although I noted it at the time.  I'm choosing to write on it now because I'm not the only one who noticed it (obviously) but others are writing about it in public, so my doing so cannot do further harm.

All military powers have secrets.  Some of them are more-serious than others, in that the harm done if they're revealed varies.  When it comes to the modern age information about our nuclear weapons programs is some of the most-secret, and with good reason -- you never want an adversary to know what you're capable of and you especially don't want them to know both what you can do and how long it will take you to do it.

Hillary said the following in the debate last night:

“But here’s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.”

Hillary probably knows exactly what those timing constraints are because as Secretary of State she had to know.  But such information is extremely sensitive and thus highly classified, almost-certainly at an SAP level (that is, "beyond top secret" as is claimed in the referenced article) because it would give an adversary critical data on our response to a potential attack and allow them to know what they must achieve to get inside our "OODA" loop.  If an adversary gets inside that loop in a fight for your life you usually die.

"OODA" stands for "observe", "orient", "decide" and "act".  It is the basic principle on which essentially all combat decisions rest.  In order to make wise decisions in combat you must perform all four steps, in order, for each offensive or defensive act you take.

All of these steps take time.

There is a romanticized view of war that comes in no small part from the media and entertainment industries -- that one decides to do something and it "just happens."  The number of films that put into a real-time context the fact that this is never how it occurs in real life is very small -- but certainly not zero.  For instance, Pearl Harbor showed the Doolittle Radier sequence, which had a huge time delay (hours) between the irrevocable decision to "go" (when the planes left the deck) and the outcome for the crews (those who didn't die were almost to a man captured in China and tortured horribly.)

The decision to use nuclear weapons is one of the greatest responsibilities that a President may be called upon to undertake.  There is nothing, ever, about the process for their release that is not considered sensitive and essentially all of it is classified at Top Secret or better.  This is especially true when it comes to latency between an order and execution; we have spent an enormous amount of money over the decades since WWII putting in place and maintaining surveillance on a world-wide basis for the explicit purpose of detecting our adversaries intentions during their latent period between a command and the launch event, and both we and our adversaries have spent a hell of a lot of money shortening those windows.

Early ICBMs were liquid-fueled and it took quite a long time to fill the missile tanks before you could fire them.  This was a tremendous deterrent to their use, in that if we detected such a fueling we could fuel our missiles and thus prevent the nightmare scenario -- being caught with warheads raining down on you while your retaliatory strike capability is on the ground!

These timelines have been dramatically shortened over the years, but it still takes time to complete that OODA loop should the horrifying reality of having to use nuclear weapons occur.  The amount of time it takes is a very serious secret that simply must never be leaked because if you do then an adversary knows what they must achieve in order to catch you with your pants down.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was as serious as it was precisely because Russia's decision to place those missiles on the Cuban coast dramatically shortened the warning time that we would have from a "go" order being given and cities in the southeast -- including Miami -- being reduced to a smoldering ruin.  That was why we nearly went to war; the presence of such weapons in that location made a decision to shoot by Russia an act that would get inside our nation's OODA loop given the technologies of the time.

For 60-odd years the threat of overwhelming response has kept our world free of offensive nuclear weapons use.  That threat is reliant on nobody knowing exactly what they must achieve to get inside their adversary's OODA loop and kill them before they can respond.  That is why such information is by any realistic determination one of any nuclear nation's mostly-closely guarded secrets and Hillary Clinton revealed that secret on national television last night.

What's far worse is that given her former position we know what she revealed was not a guess.

This singular statement last night, standing alone, should result in Hillary's immediate arrest.

It won't, but it damn well should, because she just gave away, on national television, exactly what an adversary must achieve in order to kill us all and she did so not as a matter of guesswork or hypothesis but from actual, classified knowledge.  At the same time we damn well ought to demand the arrest and prosecution of James Comey, who quite-clearly intentionally threw his investigation into prior classified material mishandling by Hillary and had he not Hillary would have been under indictment and thus unable to leak said information last night.

"What difference does it make" won't do as an excuse when all that's left of us is a smoldering hunk of charcoal.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

The latest "buzz" is around Peter Thiel, the fact that he's on Facebook's board and what amount to "no colored people allowed" signs that have been posted all over Silicon Valley firms since this political season began, and are now turning to not just signs but business lynchings.

Zuckerberg has made a "statement" that is even more outrageous than the original charge:

Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg has finally broken the silence... but it's not going to make everyone happy. In a leaked post (Facebook has since confirmed that it's authentic), Zuckerberg claims that it's all about upholding diversity. You can't just stick up for people you already agree with, he argues -- you have to also protect the rights of people with "different viewpoints."

Zuck adds that it's possible for people like Thiel to support Trump without embracing racism, sexism or other labels attached to the Republican candidate. It would be wrong to give Thiel the boot if he was really just concerned about smaller government, lower taxes or other typical right-wing views, according to the executive.

See what he did there?  Zuckerberg took someone else's label that they applied to a political candidate and used it as a means of labeling the candidate himself.

Let me remind you all of a few facts when it comes to Donald Trump and racism:

  • Nobody had accused him of any sort of systemic racism or gender bias over the space of three decades until he was a Presidential candidate. This is truly extraordinary, quite honestly, for a guy who has a few billion dollars. Why?  Because rich and powerful people are a target for such claims, some of which are true but many of which are just pure shakedown attempts. I know something about this because when I ran MCSNet I had someone try exactly that after being fired; it was laughable given the makeup of the people who were employed by my company (and didn't get any further than a government employee coming over and spending 5 minutes walking around) but yes, it was tried anyway. Why was it tried?  Because there is never a consequence for a false allegation of this sort.  Ever.

  • Trump in fact de-segregated, forcibly so via lawsuit, a country club he bought.  It has historically been extremely common for country clubs to prohibit various members on various grounds, whether they be race, sex or religion. Hell, there were still country clubs that tried to prohibit women from being members as recently as 2012!  Augusta National, where the Masters tournament is played, is the infamous poster child for such discriminatory behavior; they finally dropped the constraint just four years ago.  The entire southeast coast of Florida was rife with clubs that had allegedly-neutral restrictions on membership (frequently "geography" based) that in fact were segregation tools.  Trump bought Mar-a-Lago in 1995 and two years later rammed down the throat of the city of Palm Beach the lifting of such constraints, effectively ending the practice all up and down the east cost of the State.  Trump is one of the few wealthy businesspeople who has put his own weight and money into ending "soft" racism and related practices in the "monied" club circuit where nobody else had dared, over decades, to tread!

Look folks, if you just happen to dislike Trump for some reason that's fine. If you would prefer to have as President a woman who has quite-arguably destabilized two separate nations (Libya and Syria) through her personal actions as Secretary of State, who has now been proved to have had violent thugs on her payroll who bragged on video about disrupting her opponents campaign rallies through the incitement of violence, including in the process intentionally abusing mentally ill individuals by paying them to incite such violence and who has such disregard for data security that she's likely to compromise the most-important secrets of our nation as she has in the past if given the ability to do so once again you're free to do that.

You're even free to knowingly slur someone with charges of "racism" when the public record is that the same man you attack singlehandedly led to the desegregation of ultra-rich elite country clubs up and down the east coast of the State of Florida.

These are facts folks, whether you like them or not.

Zucker****er has the right to free speech, as do the rest of us -- even when his speech is offensive, outrageous and unsupportable on the merits.

But Zucker****er also bears, as CEO of his firm, along with Starbucks' CEO, and Netflix's CEO, all three of whom have taken up the Hillary charge and have leveled slams against Trump in recent days and weeks, the costs when those of us who are "Deplorable" exercise our exactly equal right of free speech -- which happens to include snapping our wallets closed and refusing to have anything to do with someone who we judge to be an entitled, rich piggish prick who desires nothing other than to pick our pockets and offshore jobs, destroying yet more of the middle class, for his own personal profit.

If you're a deplorable and wear the hat proudly, as I do, quit Facebook and actively boycott any business that advertises on it.  Don't patronize Starbucks -- ever.  Cancel your Netflix subscription and do not come back.

Half the country's population, roughly, is a "deplorable" according to Hillary Clinton.  Let's make those who have knowingly slurred a man with false charges of racism pay for their offenses by cutting the revenue of their firms in HALF now and forevermore.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

2016-10-19 08:08 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 709 references
[Comments enabled]  

The Veritas exposes' thus far have been very bad.

But let's take a look at just one of the things we discovered -- Bob Creamer, who "resigned" after being "outed" in a video discussing wide-scale voter fraud -- literally obtaining credentials for non-eligible people and then getting them to the polls to intentionally defraud the election process by casting votes en-masse.

He flat-out admits to voter fraud on video: "We’ve been bussing people in to deal with you f*****g *******s for fifty years....."

Project Veritas has additionally exposed explicit connections between Democrat operatives who on tape have taken credit for intentionally inciting violence at Trump rallies, and a search of the FEC reports have disclosed that at least one of those people who so-bragged was on Hillary Clinton's campaign payroll just a few days before the infamous Chicago "performance" which prevented Trump from holding his rally there.

One could take a look at this dispassionately and say "oh but that's just one."

But.... it's not.

The Creamer expose is especially galling because he is a convicted felon, and the spouse of a Congresswoman.  His crime?  He swindled financial institutions while running a "public interest group" and pocketed income taxes instead of depositing them!

Not only was he still (in his own words) conspiring to commit criminal acts 10 years later, in this case voter fraud, but in addition he appears 342 times in the White House visitor log during Obama's two termsincluding dozens in which he met with Obama himself.

You don't have to like Trump.  There are plenty of things that I don't personally care for when it comes to Trump myself.  But I cannot, and will not, vote to place in the White House someone who I truly believe is a felon, albeit un-indicted and un-convicted (so far), along with a bunch of associates who have admitted, on tape, to actual crimes, some of whom have been convicted of prior felonies, and who additionally have now been caught on tape admitting to or conspiring to commit even more unlawful acts including the most-important crimes of all in a political context -- subverting and corrupting our elections.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for criminality -- not just in Hillary herself but also through those who she associates herself with and pays through her campaign.

Are you really crazy enough to vote for criminality in the White House?

Are you willing to vote for and sanction the literal destruction of all authority with regard to the Executive, who I remind you is responsible for enforcement of the law under our Constitution?  Such an act could quite conceivably lead to an actual war -- either with other major world powers or, possibly worse, a civil war right here in America.

And finally, what makes you so sure that all this corruption, fraud and blatant refusal to prosecute criminal acts won't be used against you?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Gee, why is this a surprise?

Obese women on a high-protein diet, most of whom lost significant weight, did so at a substantial cost -- they did not obtain a corresponding improvement in skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity that would normally be expected with such a degree of weight loss, a randomized trial showed.

In contrast, improvement of 25% to 30% in insulin sensitivity was seen in a control group with similar weight loss on a diet with protein intake limited to the recommended daily allowance, reported Bettina Mittendorfer, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, and colleagues online in Cell Reports.

Remember what happens when you eat too much protein: It is converted to glucose by the body!

In other words eating more protein than you require (in an attempt to reduce fast carbohydrates and/or fat intake) might cause you to lose weight but whether it does or doesn't it won't help your insulin resistance!

That's not surprising -- it is in fact expected!

High protein intake during weight loss is commonly believed to be important in order to preserve lean tissue mass and reduce the potential for adverse effects like sarcopenia in those at risk, including postmenopausal women. However, the trade-off in terms of lack of weight-loss-related improvements in insulin sensitivity may not support the benefit, the researchers suggested.

Only by idiots.

Eat a high fat (saturated fat), moderate protein (sufficient for your amino acid requirements; typically in the 20-25% of calories range) and low carbohydrate diet (<50g/day) and I'm willing to bet that you will find that (1) your pants fall off (the primary goal), (2) you have no issue with maintaining muscle mass (good) and (3) your insulin sensitivity improves.

I have not run a multi-million dollar randomized trial (which is quite hard to do successfully, incidentally, because people can and do cheat, they can and do tell the difference between various diets, and they can and do eat things outside of their assigned "diet" unless you can lock them up for the duration, which is entirely impractical) but I can tell you these were the exact results that I saw in myself -- and have maintained over the previous five years without counting calories or other sorts of extraordinary effort.

You do what you want, but if you try to tell me that what I did doesn't work I'll point at myself and laugh at you, because it most-certainly did in my case and I'm not alone in that regard either.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Yeah, right..... an "honest mistake".

The incident occurred on Grayson Highway, Tuesday morning.

Police say when they arrived on the scene, toilet paper was scattered everywhere and there was a foul smell.

A Lawrenceville businessman took several photos of the tour bus dumping waste into the storm drain. You can see in the pictures, a liquid coming from the bottom of the bus.

It's not an "honest mistake."

There are dump stations in many rest areas, and others that are commercial (and charge money.)  It is blatantly unlawful to discharge untreated human waste into US waterways, whether directly or indirectly.  Every tour bus operator and for that matter every boat operator knows this; it is a matter of federal law.

It is, further, illegal under state law to discharge untreated human waste in such a fashion that it can or will enter the waterways of a given state. In addition to being foul in smell human waste carries pathogens that, if not treated to destroy them, can cause serious disease including but certainly not limited to cholera.

The Hillary campaign literally **** on the people of Georgia and those responsible must be held to account to the fullest extent of the law.

PS: Sent to me by a reader: Apparently this sort of thing is good for a $200,000 fine. Sounds about right.  Take it out of Hillary's ass.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
The CERTAIN Destruction Of Our Nation

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 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.