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.

2018-11-18 11:25 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 81 references
[Comments enabled]  

Yeah., right, Zucker****er, go ahead and claim this didn't happen...

When testifying before Congress about data privacy earlier this year, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg denied the departure had anything to do with politics.

Mr. Luckey, it turns out, was put on leave, then fired, according to people familiar with the matter. More recently, he has told people the reason was his support for Donald Trump and the furor that his political beliefs sparked within Facebook and Silicon Valley, some of those people say.

Internal Facebook emails suggest the matter was discussed at the highest levels of the company. In the fall of 2016, as unhappiness over the donation simmered, Facebook executives including Mr. Zuckerberg pressured Mr. Luckey to publicly voice support for libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, despite Mr. Luckey’s years-long support of Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the conversations and internal emails viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

In other words despite those allegedly being "internal use only" someone got them out and the Journal saw them.

Oh by the way, if he wasn't fired for such a reason could you please explain why he managed to negotiate $100 million in severance?  I'd loooove to hear the explanation for that one.

I'm sure there will be some other excuse since this guy was an Oculus founder.  But remember -- there was some litigation there too related to theft of intellectual property.  Untangling the truth might prove problematic, but the timeline simply does not pass the giggle test when the claim is made that his support of Trump had "nothing" to do with the dismissal -- especially considering the material amount of evidence that appears to exist documenting the rage-monster nonsense going on within the company and tolerated by the management thereof simply because this guy had the termerity to support a politician.

Folks, people can be fired in most places because management doesn't like their hair color.  That's not the issue.

The issue is the lying about it and the idea that the inmates run the asylum; that if employees raise hell about someone's political beliefs on internal, company sponsored and operated message systems that such can lead to a "job action."

What sort of crap is that?

Are you a Trump Supporter and have a Facesucker account?  Given this -- why?

Screw this firm where it hurts -- an active boycott of not only Facesucker but its advertisers by half the nation will destroy it inside of a week.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-11-17 08:10 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 94 references
[Comments enabled]  

smiley

Or is it?  The world's most-intelligent service has said so though....

The CIA has concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul last month, contradicting the Saudi government’s claims that he was not involved in the killing, according to people familiar with the matter.

What's the response?  Nothing?

How about a complete boycott of all Saudi oil and other products and services, cutting them off from all US Dollar transactions (to which they're pegged, which would destroy their economy overnight), rescinding protection for cartels in US law and then prosecuting the entire nation and the rest of OPEC for price-fixing?

Oh by the way, we can do that now without trashing our own economy -- we're energy self-sufficient.  For real.

Of course other nations are not, and they might get pissed.  So what?

Oh and then there's the obvious question, which I raised before: Why are we suddenly concerned with one political murder when three thousand political murders, on our own soil and which the Saudis promoted, financed and which the majority of the murderers were their nationals, took place on 9/11?

How about the millions of people they've contributed to murdering by spreading their Salafi-based horse**** political ideology wrapped in the claim of "religion"?  Do none of those dead people count?

Got any answers to those questions, Mr. President?  Mr. Obama didn't.  Nor did Mr. Bush.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-11-16 15:25 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 123 references
[Comments enabled]  

This is complete and utter crap.

A federal judge ruled in favor of CNN on Friday, allowing the network’s star reporter Jim Acosta to temporarily regain access to his White House press credential.

"I will grant the application for the temporary restraining order. I order the government reinstate the pass," U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled from Washington.

Kelly – who rescheduled Thursday’s planned hearing for Friday morning – heard lengthy oral arguments earlier in the week about the cable news network’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The administration had suspended Acosta's "hard pass," which provided expedited access to the White House grounds.

Total and complete garbage.

Let's start with the first part of this -- Due Process -- because it begins and ends there.

Since when does a discretionary "hard pass" come with a Due Process right?

Remember, the Fifth Amendment says:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What was he deprived of that fell into the category of life, liberty or property?

He was not deprived of life.

He was not deprived of property.

He was not deprived of liberty as nobody has a right to enter into the White House grounds (go ahead and try it sometime without invitation -- prepare to be immediately arrested or even shot!)

The 5th Amendment does not mean that a privilege extended to someone comes with a due process right that now attaches before said privilege is revoked.  That's the salient difference between rights and privileges; one attaches to you as a consequence of being human; the other is discretionary and thus can be withdrawn.

Conflating these two is how we have permitted all sorts of crap -- such as "driver licenses" for non-commercial use of the roads -- to take place.  You have a liberty right to use public roads to transport your person and personal effects for non-commercial purposes and in fact the courts have ruled that you have a right to travel on same using the means customary to the present day.  Yes, there really is a ruling that says that -- which means "driver licenses" are unconstitutional.  So are mandatory insurance laws as does demanding you accept financial responsibility for the unlimited in price decisions of others on those same roads.  In other words my decision to spend $1 million on an exotic car becomes your potential liability if there is an accident.  That's insane; I had no voice or vote in your decision to place a million dollars of your property "at risk" in public and the financial responsibility for that decision should be yours, attaching with the power to make the decision!

On the other hand and in the instant case you have no right to be present in the various halls of government except by invitation of the office-holder thereof.  Try to claim a right to sit in the office of a Senator or Representative and see how that works out for you. If the officeholders set forward some means of public access (e.g. the Gallery in the House and Senate) then all well and good but note that all who refuse to follow the rules -- you may observe in those Galleries but may not demonstrate in any way, whether verbally or via waving of signs and other items.  You can be and will be immediately removed by armed police officers if you in any way attempt to disrupt the proceedings.

Thus is the case here.  This issue does not turn on whether Acosta legally committed assault.

It turns on his refusal to follow a legitimate request from a White House staffer to surrender the microphone that did not belong to him -- that microphone was White House property.  Possession of same once you have been told to surrender it is theft by conversion -- for openers.  It is not only a violation of reasonable and customary decorum it is a criminal offense, albeit given the likely value of said microphone a misdemeanor (theft by conversion.)

This "judge" is nothing of the sort and it matters not who appointed him.

No judge has the power to contravene the Constitution nor to invent language that is not present no matter how grave -- or trivial -- the subject matter.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-11-13 06:54 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 180 references
[Comments enabled]  

Oh my....

Republicans in Congress will hold the majority for less than two months. We must do all we can to further the agenda we promised in 2016 and in 2018 before the Democrats take a wrecking ball to the progress America has made in the last two years.

Then there's the list.

Health care (Obamacare)

The Wall.

Pro-Life ("heartbeat") bill.

Balanced budget.

Meh.

Health care isn't broken because it's government-mandated health-care (Obamacare.)  It's broken because the government has refused to enforce 100+ year old anti-trust law that medical firms have twice claimed didn't apply to them, ran that argument all the way to the Supreme Court and lost both times.  Having lost in the courts they turned to bribing government instead.  5 INDICTMENTS with a promise of 5,000 more in a week would permanently stop this crap and make Obamacare irrelevant by cutting the cost of health care by 80% At the same time it would erase the budget deficit.  Oh, and never mind spending $400 billion a year that doesn't need to be spent at all because adults are coddled like children.

The wall isn't an option it's an executive requirement under Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution.  If Trump will not do his job he must be removed and replaced.

Pro-life?  Meh.  Talk to me about abortion when you stop the three trillion a year stolen by the health care monopolies and the third-leading cause of death is erased too, which is "medical errors" -- in other words, gross incompetence driven by a system that gets paid when it fails or even makes the situation worse.

As for a balanced budget, stop lying.  Passing unfunded tax cuts and entitlement increases at the same time, running a 6.2% deficit last fiscal year is not an accident -- its an intentional act to goose the stock market.  It works every time it's done too, for a little while.  Then the market crashes -- every single time.  The goosing has already happened.  Guess what's next?

Of course by the the time the crash comes the party that did it is usually out of office -- in this case, they'll be out of office in 2 months.

Isn't that convenient?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2018-11-10 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 398 references
[Comments enabled]  

Oh this is rich.....

If you follow the news you know that Bannon and Frum had a debate in Toronto recently.  The so-called tolerant Liberals tried to prevent the debate from taking place.  Then a screw-up at the end left people with the mistaken belief that Bannon had actually won, when in point of fact it appears the results were, by the scoring used, a statistical tie.

But the screamer -- Frum blowing his own brains out -- is right here:

The story ends, then, in a great irony. Integral to the liberal project, again in the broad sense of the word liberal, is confidence in the power of reason. Words and arguments can overbear ignorance and prejudice. Over the long term, words and arguments can even overcome oppression and violence. That’s why liberals in the broad sense are so uniquely horrified by official lying: How can reason prevail unless words connect to reality? How can we argue against people who will spread fictions, if serviceable to them, without a qualm?

What?

There has not been one whit of honesty in, for example, the treatment of Kavanaugh.  Every single liberal -- big "L" or little "l" -- involved has consistently lied.  There are now two criminal referrals for lying about capital felonies.  The media has breathlessly reported all of the lies and not one bit of the refutation of same, nor has it focused in any way on the rank hypocrisy and inconsistencies -- all hallmarks of lying.

Ditto for the so-called "caravan."  The facts are that these individuals broke the law immediately upon entering Mexico which they did, largely, by force.  That is they broke down a fence or jumped a border after being told not to; it is not as if there was any question that they knew their actions were criminal.  They did not care.

Then there is the rabid anti-Semite that was caught in NY; the media and liberals all claimed right up front when the graffiti and attempted arsons happened that it must be a white Trump supporter.  They did so without a single shred of evidence and then, when the alleged perpetrator was caught and it turned out to be a black, queer and liberal activist do you think there was a single apology rendered?  Oh hell no.

How can reason prevail unless words connect to reality?

I'll answer that: It cannot and thank you very much for splattering your own brains all over the sidewalk, Frum -- and that of the Atlantic, for which you work.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)