The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Corruption]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
Delusion Will Not Get You Hired

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.


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.

2018-03-18 15:46 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 209 references
[Comments enabled]  

We needed no new laws.

Governor Scott and the Florida Legislature -- both Houses -- committed an unspeakable crime against the people of this state.  They must all be removed from office, their faux "law" that is unconstitutional must be torn up and they must go to prison.


We now know that not only did two Sheriffs refuse to arrest or charge the shooter with felonies they had reported to them we also now know that the actual deputy who refused to enter the school knew Cruz was dangerous and in fact subject to involuntary commitment under previously existing state law.

Some school counselors and officials were so concerned about the mental stability of Nikolas Cruz, accused in last month’s Florida school massacre, that they reportedly decided to have him forcibly committed more than a year before the shooting.

However, the recommendation was never acted upon.


The documents showed a high school resource officer who was also a sheriff's deputy and two school counselors recommended in September 2016 that Cruz be committed for mental evaluation under Florida's Baker Act. That law allows for involuntary commitment for mental health examination for at least three days.

That's the same deputy who refused to go in, knowing the shooter was inside shooting.

Had that involuntary commitment occurred and then was confirmed by judicial hearing it would have served as a bar to the legal purchase of firearms (Form 4473, question 11f)

I quote:

A determination by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition or disease(1) is a danger to himself or to others or; (2) lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.......

The "three day hold" must be confirmed by a court during those three days.  But once that occurs it is entered into the system and would be picked up by NICS (which the FDLE runs in Florida) had he lied.

You can read the actual law here. It provides for a robust system of due process and also allows for continued retention on an involuntary basis for people who are a danger to themselves or others.  One of the specific criteria for same is:

b. There is substantial likelihood that in the near future he or she will inflict serious bodily harm on self or others, as evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting, or threatening such harm....

A finding under this law is an involuntary commitment and thus a bar to legal firearms purchase.

There is exactly zero justification for more laws which will be ignored whenever it suits the authorities and which are always ignored by criminals.  We now know that there was no question that the existing laws and authorities in Florida were sufficient to prevent this shooting from happening.

David Hogg and others pursued their agenda with deliberate intent, backed by the Legislature and Governor, to deprive people of their rights under color of law and authority and they did so by ramming this change in the law down everyone's throat before the facts were able to come to the table proving that no new law was necessary as existing legal authorities were more than sufficient to prevent the shooting from taking place if those in charge of enforcing the law actually did so.

In short there was no law needed nor would it help; this was a pure grab against rights guaranteed by the Constitution and thus stands as an unconstitutional and unlawful act by every single person so-involved.


View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-03-16 11:15 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 89 references
[Comments enabled]  

Refer here to form 4473, which anyone who's ever bought a gun is familiar with.

Specifically, question 11(b).

Now read this:

The FBI has removed thousands of people who are wanted by authorities from a criminal background check database that stops them purchasing weapons.

The law enforcement agency moved in February to narrow its definition of a “fugitive from justice.” That definition now only applies to wanted people who have crossed states lines, The Washington Post reported.

That's question 11(d), but it doesn't matter because in order to be a fugitive from justice you must have been indicted or under an information (formal accusation) of a crime and be evading prosecution or have been convicted and are evading punishment.  In other words you can't be a fugitive unless you've been charged or convicted, and if you're charged or convicted you are already a prohibited person!

So under exactly what authority would the FBI remove such people from the system?


Why is it that the FBI -- and everyone personally involved in this including Trump's AG and FBI director is not charged with intentionally enabling the delivery of firearms to prohibited persons since it is not possible to be a fugitive from justice unless you have been charged with a criminal offense or convicted of one and if you have then whether you crossed a state line to evade prosecution is immaterial as you're prohibited under one of the other sections.

NICS is blatantly unconstitutional but if we are going to play "pretend Constitution" then can we at least expect the FBI and rest of the government to actually do so?  Apparently not.

When does the stupid stop and when do government employees that blatantly and outrageously violate the law face indictment themselves?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-03-14 13:34 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 533 references
[Comments enabled]  

How do you make nearly three quarters of a billion dollars?

Lie, cheat and scam.

The penalty when you get caught?  $500,000, or less than one thousandth of what you stole -- and not one second of prison time.

Theranos Inc. and its founder Elizabeth Holmes agreed to settle U.S. allegations that they raised more than $700 million from investors through an elaborate fraud in which they exaggerated or made false statements about their technology, business and financial performance.


Holmes agreed to pay a $500,000 penalty to resolve the case, surrender voting control of Theranos, and be barred from serving as an officer of a public company for 10 years, the SEC said.

Remember that the claim this company made was that with one single drop of blood they could run dozens of tests with greater accuracy, not only saving time but money, using a machine they had invented.  It was all a lie; the alleged machine never worked.

Maybe you can explain to me where the deterrent is for, say, Jeff Bezos to not break anti-trust (or tax) law.

Maybe you can explain to me why a health care executive wouldn't break anti-trust law knowingly and willingly, even though it's a felony, given this precedent.

Indeed perhaps you can explain to me why, until the aggrieved people in one or more of these cases decide that there no justice, ever, when it comes to such acts and decide to spend their life while attempting to take many more, that this sort of "punishment" will result in any sort of deterrent against more and larger scams?

You do not want to live in a world where a choice to spend one's life obtaining redress, which I remind you for a sane, logical actor will result not in riots or assaults on cops and well-guarded politicians but rather in lethal violence being directed at the easiest and least-hardened persons who were either in some way involved or refused to act in the bringing and enforcement of meaningful punishment, is the only available means of obtaining anything reasonably associated with the word "justice" when "massive scams" go completely unpunished.

Yet that is the very example our government has set and thus promotes, whether it intends to or not right now, right here, today and for the last several decades in countless cases of fraud, theft, scam and extortion -- including but certainly not limited to this one.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

I bet you read this story and fail to understand the significance of it....

A Tunisian native allegedly in the U.S. illegally was charged Wednesday over an incident that involved an AR 15-style rifle with a bump stock being found outside an Indianapolis hotel before a popular women's march, The Indianapolis Star reported.

He claimed the gun was his Dad's -- so who's his Dad?  Given that this guy is Tunisian (and not an American) is his father an illegal immigrant, is he here on some sort of "refugee" deal or what?

Remember that it's not legal to buy a gun in this country unless you are either a citizen or a lawful permanent resident.  Someone here on a visa of any sort cannot own or possess a firearm except under very limited circumstances.  For example you can come here to hunt provided you've got a valid hunting license and declared your intention to do so when coming to the United States (and presumably were vetted to make sure you weren't intending to hunt people!)

So this story leads to several questions immediately:

1. Who's this guy's Dad and is he either a lawful permanent resident or citizen?  If not how did he get the guns?

2. Junior was here on a non-immigrant visa.  It was therefore illegal for him to possess the weapon and it was illegal for his father to let him have it; he certainly can't claim to not know his son is not a lawful permanent resident.  Why hasn't Dad been arrested irrespective of his immigrant or citizenship status for the blatantly-illegal transfer?  The only excuse Dad has is if the guns were stolen, but that sounds damned unlikely since junior was caught with several firearms.

3. This guy allegedly has been interdicted twice since September 2017 when his student visa was "terminated."  Note that the story doesn't say expired, it says terminated.  Why was it terminated, why wasn't he immediately removed from the country and why wasn't he arrested and deported after the first LEO encounter?

4. Oh, and who was President during both of these interdiction events, who was President when his student visa was terminated and who's Executive did not immediately remove him when they terminated his student visa?

Oh by the way, in case you weren't paying attention, this is not in a liberal Hellhole Sanctuary City either.  It happened in Indiana, which is Mr. VP Pence's home state and is an allegedly conservative and "Red" state which allegedly is fully ok with enforcement of immigration laws.

But for some alert hotel employees, however, this guy would not only still be here illegally he'd still be illegally possessing firearms and maybe intending to pull a Jihadi Joe, never mind that there's zero indication that the source of his firearms, who certainly can't claim to be ignorant of his immigration status and thus knowingly transferred them, hasn't been busted for a quite-clear black-letter offense as well.

So much for Trump/Pence and their much-vaunted (foolishly so) claimed support of getting criminal illegal invaders out of here on a preemptive basis before they do evil things.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2018-03-12 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 103 references
[Comments enabled]  

What -- you mean it's possible for the cops to do their jobs?

An art teacher reported a student to school officials after being threatened. The school’s investigation cleared the student. The teacher then mentioned the threat to her husband, who called police.

Of course the school cleared the student.  They didn't want to actually do something that might hit their bribe, er, "safe school" money from the Feral Government.  Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...... like in Broward County, to be specific....

Except that the "deal" they made in Broward didn't allow them to tamper with a felony event, because that's illegal in Florida.  In fact, it's very illegal -- the act of doing so is a felony itself (3rd degree) and thus the real question for Parkland, as it is here, is exactly when are we going to see charges laid against school administrators that appear to have violated the Official Misconduct Act in the State of Florida?

In this case the perp-to-be got arrested because the teacher's husband went to the cops independently and made a stink.  In the Parkland case the cops and the administrators buried the issue and thus...... 17 dead.

That makes two school administrations and but for an independent (and thinking) husband another jackass might have done something similar.

Where are the damned handcuffs and, speaking of investigations, where is the FDLE when it comes to going after all of the districts in Florida, going through their records, especially those that have put together these "diversion" deals with the local Sheriffs and courts, to determine if any felony acts were "redirected", buried or otherwise altered in their handling as any such event certainly appears to be a flat-out felony violation of Florida law.

This investigation not only needs to happen and be state-wide it must be public and immediate, with any violations discovered immediately and publicly referred for prosecution.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)