Fraud

NY conducts its own COVID-19 investigation on itself – finds no fault

Who knew? NY State Dept of Health conducted an investigation on itself as to the impacts of Gov Cuomo’s order which forced nursing homes to take in people that tested positive for COVID-19. Verdict? Not guilty!

Cuomo’s DoH concluded that the governor’s mandate did not have a significant impact in terms of the 6,000+ fatalities.

Instead, it blamed family members and staffers who unknowingly brought the virus into these nursing homes.

A witness, Frank Kolbmann, told New York Health Commissioner Howard Zucker in no uncertain terms that he is involved in “a disingenuous cosmetic attempt to cover up for your current boss’ immense crime.

Janice Dean lost both her in-laws, Mickey and Dee Newman, in a New York nursing home and directly blames Cuomo’s mandate for this avoidable tragedy. According to Townhall, Dean sent in her formal request last week to testify. However, just hours before the hearing, she was dropped from the list.

We are quite sure there are many crooked companies that would love to be able to audit their own accounts and claim they are compliant with the soundest corporate governance standards.

Anything short of an independent investigation is a farce. One can imagine Victoria will follow a similar path of “independence” in its investigation on the second outbreak.

Lightfoot the Lightweight

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is a complete lightweight.

As murders and gun crime soar across the city post George Floyd’s death, Lightfoot is focusing her energies on the ‘Census Cowboy‘ to get Chicagoans to fill in online forms. Could it be that residents are more concerned with stray bullets coming through their windows than indulging a mounted black cowboy carrying a ‘Census 2020‘ flag?

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany called Lightfoot “derelict” to which the mayor responded to Trump’s spokeswoman as a “Karen,” a derogatory term to denote a white woman of privilege who has racist tendencies.

Remember when Alderman Raymond Lopez questioned the mayor about what she planned to do to stop businesses being destroyed and quell gang violence? She replied that he was “full of sh*t

Lightfoot is living too much in the limelight of identity politics to deal with the truths in her city. Residents don’t care whether she is a lesbian or black. They want an end to the violence.

Democratic politician pens his own hate crime hoax in Oregon

You have to love it when the very systemic racism we’re told is so rife in America caused a Democratic political candidate, Jonathan Lopez, to pen and post a letter to himself and take his claim of a hate crime to the police because he couldn’t find it in reality.

His letter said,

Don’t waste your time trying to become anything in this county…we will make sure you never win and your family suffers along with all the other f–king Mexicans in the area!

Lopez took to social media to peddle his hate hoax by uploading the letter and claiming he “holds no resentment for whomever wrote this…just simply heartbroken for the lack of knowledge, education, and respect missing…I pray for you and wish you prosperity in your life.”

Hermiston Police Chief Jason Edmiston expressed his dismay after the conclusion of the investigation with the following comment:

The time spent on this fictitious claim means time lost on other matters, not to mention it needlessly adds to the incredible tension that exists in our nation today…Our investigation has shown that Mr. Lopez wrote the letter himself and made false statements to the police and on social media.”

After Lopez admitted his crime he tried to downplay it by saying that things had spiraled out of control. Really? Who knew?

Is this why Democrats want to defund the police so they don’t have the resources to catch out hoaxes?

His case will be forwarded to the Umatilla County District Attorney’s office for initiating a false report, a Class A misdemeanor in Oregon.

Welcome to 2020 where the real racists are the very people claiming they’re the victims.

WaPo admits bounty on US soldiers evidence sketchy and needed confirmation but ran with it anyway

Opinion | This is how democracy dies — in full view of a public ...

The mainstream media has been foaming at the mouth hoping that Trump knew about intelligence that said that Russians were paying bounties to insurgents in Afghanistan for killing US and coalition troops. Social media ran with a #TRE45ON hashtag. They so wanted it to be true. Anything to prevent his reelection. Smear, slime, lie.

It turns out that WaPo has been forced to admit that the information was deemed sketchy and in need of additional confirmation. But hey, let’s run with it anyway!

The NY Times was equally complicit. It was running stories of slain soldiers in Afghanistan in an attempt to smear the president. These journalists have absolutely no morals or ethics. Use dead soldiers to push uncorroborated evidence to feed a narrative.

Shameless. WaPo’s “Democracy dies in darkness” and The NY Times “All the news that fit to print” mottos are perhaps the most inaccurate descriptors imaginable.

As we like to say, journalistic integrity will only return when the mainstream media loves America more than they hate Trump.

Tiger King – we dare you not to binge-watch

Yesterday we watched the Netflix docu-series, ‘Tiger King‘ which runs through the five years in the lead up to zoo-keeper Joe Exotic’s 22-yr conviction for murder-for-hire.

In a word – mind-blowing.  The production is outstanding. You’d never believe that you could watch seven 45-minute episodes of this saga. Believe me, you can!

It is an eye-opener into the sordid pits of the human mind. To see how a group of misfits with literally no other choices in life become locked into an ecosystem which is so awful to them yet they manage to pledge a strong sense of loyalty to the Tiger King.

At the top of the tree, the politics of control come into play resulting from power shifts that spawn out of poor ego-centric driven management decisions. This created almost comical incidents of multiple-felons demanding ethical behaviour and strict governance.

Note that Joe Exotic ran in the 2016 presidential election. He managed 872 votes in Colorado placing him 11th out of 23 candidates. After missing out he ran for the Governor of Oklahoma. Unfortunately, he missed out on the Libertarian ticket with 669 votes or 18% of that primary.

In a nutshell, Tiger King encapsulates exotic animals, cults, guns, explosives, murder, felons, criminals, disappearances, sex, prostitution, polygamy, brainwashing, faith, amputations, guns-for-hire, incomplete police investigations, LGBT rednecks, employer coerced breast implants, arson, theft, embezzlement, political ambitions, social media, copyright infringement, lawyers, court cases, punitive damages and Walmart. Seeing is believing. Be warned – there is zero political correctness.

As someone from my former university best put it,

If you thought you had seen everything, get ready to understand that you are still wading in the kiddie pool.

God Bless America!

It must be a disaster for The Guardian to have this opinion

No need for words – it speaks volumes if The Guardian admits Trump is the winner in Iowa.

Outrage at the most predictable event in American history

Whatever outrage one wants to express over the rights and wrongs during the impeachment saga, it has been the most predictable event in American history.

There was no surprise that the Senate didn’t indulge the Democrats with more witnesses. For two reasons:

1) Partisan lines (don’t think for a second the Dems wouldn’t have done the same had they held a majority in the upper house). The GOP did play by the constitution in its rejection of witnesses. The Dems are the pot calling the kettle black given their actions in the House of Representatives;

2) the Democrats had all the time in the world to lengthen their own impeachment trial in the lower house to include any witnesses they chose – including Bolton. They didn’t, such was their wish to rush the trial (at least until Nancy’s pens arrived). Now it is convenient to point fingers at the GOP for not doing what it could have done itself was it to be thorough in the initial process. Is it the GOP’s fault for the sloppiness of its opponent?

It was no secret that Bolton intended to spill his version of the beans in his role as NSA director. He openly admitted as much on Twitter well before the House passed the articles of Impeachment to the Senate. The Democrats knew it. His tweets went viral. Why didn’t Schiff wait? They would have had their man in the witness box.

Politics is a dirty game. For all those that are complaining at the conduct of the GOP senators, they clearly weighed their re-election chances via their actions. At the moment, Trump’s re-election still looks assured, with the added insult Trump would technically be able to run in the 2024 election too, given a failed impeachment resets the clock.

The GOP have argued there was no victim, therefore no crime. We can play semantics til the cows come home but this trial was open and shut before it began. No surprises at all. Not lost on the American public either.

When the Washington Post ran an article on the 20th January 2017 which read,

The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun

the sinister campaign by the Democrats – who couldn’t believe Hillary wasn’t coronated – to find a way to remove Trump by any means started. Representatives like Maxine Waters were wailing “Impeach 45” well before the phone call with Ukraine. Rep Tlaib happily shouted “we’re gonna impeach the mother f@cker” when she won her seat. Well before the impeachment trial.

One has to wonder whether the Deep State goes to DEFCON 1 and tries more extreme measures to remove him. Let’s hope for all our sakes, no such event transpires.

Dutch Supreme Court sets very dangerous precedent

No folks, this is not a joke. This is what happens when a judiciary drops impartiality and starts acting as an activist lawmaker instead of a law enforcer. The Dutch parliament is supposed to set legislation. Since when did the judiciary inherit such capabilities by a mandate from the people?

The Dutch Supreme Court has ruled the Dutch government must cut emissions by 25% by 2020 on 1990 levels on the grounds that not doing so is a violation of human rights.

To put that into context, on a per capita basis, Dutch GHG emissions have fallen 11.9% since 1990 to 9.5t per person. However, actual Dutch CO2 output in 1990 was 161,447kt CO2-e vs 162,290kt CO2e in 2017 based on. So a 25% cut vs. 1990 levels would mean the target would be 121,085kt CO2-e.

Let us not forget that the Dutch are responsible for 0.4% of global human-caused emissions. So to cut that by 25% on the latest numbers with growing emissions from China and India will mean the Dutch will be responsible for 0.3% of global emissions. Does the Dutch Supreme Court truly believe the lives of Dutch citizens will be remotely improved by knocking 0.1% off the global total?

Clearly, the Supreme Court didn’t need evidence. Which body did the Supreme Court base its verdict? On UN climate conventions. There is a problem in and of itself.

Never mind that the UN said this about the Netherlands in the past,

The WG2 IPCC climate bible noted, “The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea-level rise and river flooding because 55% of its territory is below sea level”.

This sentence was provided by a Dutch government agency – the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, which published a correction stating that the sentence should have read “55 per cent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding; 26 per cent of the country is below sea level, and 29 per cent is susceptible to river flooding.”

Never mind that the UN didn’t issue a retraction. Who needs to know correct facts?

It gets worse,

An IPCC report which investigated models showed 98% have overestimated warming.

The Twelfth Session of Working Group I (WGI-12) was held from 23 to 26 September 2013 in Stockholm, Sweden. At the Session, the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (WGI AR5) was approved and the underlying scientific and technical assessment accepted.

Everything in the Working Group II report depends entirely on Working Group I and Working Group I depends solely on the climate data of which 98% have proven wrong.

Chapter Nine “Evaluation of Climate Models” in WGI-12 notes:

Most, though not all, models overestimate the observed warming trend in the tropical troposphere over the last 30 years and tend to underestimate the long-term lower stratospheric cooling trend. {9.4.1, Box 9.2, Figure 9.8}

“…In tropical regions, the models are too dry in the lower troposphere and too moist in the upper troposphere,” (p763)

Most climate model simulations show a larger warming in the tropical troposphere than is found in observational data sets(e.g., McKitrick et al., 2010; Santer et al., 2013).

Does the Dutch Supreme Court believe it knows better than the scientists the UN rely upon who openly admit the data is wrong? So climate change could affect food supply?

We all know the Dutch love chocolate.

Half of the world’s chocolate is currently sourced from just two African countries: Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make it less suitable for cocoa production in the future.

The research highlighted in the IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability report indicate that, under a “business as usual” scenario, those countries will experience a 3.8°F (2.1°C) increase in temperature by 2050 which could seriously impact cocoa production.

Claims that changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable…production has more than doubled in the past 3 decades.

Dutch PM Mark Rutte was absolutely right to say this was a matter for politicians, not courts. What has been proven by this landmark decision is that the court is acting as a lawmaker which is NOT its role.

While some could argue that the Green Left took 9.1% of the vote in the 2017 Dutch election – its best-ever result – the latest polls for 2021 see the party ceding seats. It is hardly a mandate of the people to drastically cut emissions in such a ridiculous space of time.

Has the Dutch Supreme Court understood that c.20% of the economy is driven by industry – electronics, metal production, engineering – and agriculture? Should PM Rutte demand that it all be shut down? Will air traffic controllers at Schipol Airport be arrested and jailed if they let commercial aeroplanes circle for too long in low visibility conditions?

Dutch electricity generation is 75% powered by fossil fuels (natural gas and coal). Does the Supreme Court believe that cutting emissions 25% by 2020 is even remotely achievable without trashing the economy? Will cars be banned from the roads on weekends? Flights suspended on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays? How about Dutch citizens who don’t have a windmill bolted to their home get electricity rationed?

In conclusion, how on earth can the Dutch hit a 25% reduction target inside 12 months? Who will be charged and jailed for failing to meet these obligations in a country where no party has a mandate?

FNF Media sincerely hopes the Dutch government acquiesces the Supreme Court and watches the economy implode as it pushes energy austerity to hit targets that will reduce global emissions by 0.1%, or a 0.00000124% impact to all the CO2 in the atmosphere. All that pain for absolutely no gain.

We need a test case guinea pig to show the world just how ridiculously stupid climate alarmism is. At least the Dutch can self-medicate inside marijuana cafes in Amsterdam.

In all seriousness, the landmark decision of a Supreme Court dictating terms to the very body that sets laws is one that sets a dangerous precedent. Activism is now part and parcel of the Dutch judiciary.

Trump was the people’s handgrenade. They never expected the Dems to pull the pin

Two interesting videos which expose the despicable nature of this impeachment trial.

One video is the mainstream media saying Ambassador Sondland tied Trump to a quid pro quo. As he clearly states he only “presumed” and that absolutely nobody told him. Hearsay is being counted as good as real evidence. Schiff has been so crooked during this trial claiming he didn’t know the whistleblower’s identity but shutting down Lt Col Vandiman to prevent him from saying his name.

The second is the way the Dems have shifted the narrative from quid pro quo to bribery. In the 3,500 pages of sworn testimony the word is mentioned once and not referring to Trump but toward allegations about Joe Biden. Amusing that a mainstream media poll discovered that “bribery” was the biggest catch word that would justify an impeachment so Trump Derangement Syndrome has got the better of the Democrats and the impeachment is now shifted towards bribery allegations.

Regardless of the evidence, Democrats will vote for impeachment. The Senate will reject it and this will be a show trial with no benefit to anyone other than to expose the lengths the Dems will go to pull down a sitting president. A waste of time and money which if anything has exposed how much corruption was in the prior administration to have a former Ambassador to Ukraine testify she had been pre-prepped by the State Department to know how to handle questions on Hunter Biden’s involvement at Burisma, clearly understanding the massive conflict of interest. Yet no other companies in the Ukraine required such preparation. Hmmmm.

Say, has anyone heard any stories on Joe Biden lately? Mysteriously absent.

This is not lost on the American people, as much as they weren’t fooled by Bill Clinton’s chance meeting on an airport tarmac with then AG Loretta Lynch, a few days before her testimony answering questions about his wife. Grandkids and golf is all they spoke about apparently.

Yeah, right.

TDS is a mental health issue. The Democrats have spent his entire presidency trying to pin anything on him they can – Russia, Ukraine, Stormy Daniels etc etc. As vulgar and unorthodox as his methods may be, the results are way better than anyone predicted. Most Americans who voted for him weren’t seeking his advice on morals and behaviour. He was there so the left behind could lob a handgrenade into decades of political incompetence, which apparently is all his fault, not career politicians.

The irony is that the Democrats have pulled the pin on themselves and done no favour a for re-election in 2020. If he wins they know they’re the ones he is coming after. That petrifies them.

This can only end in tears

ECB.png

As Sweden’s economy slows to the worst economic growth rate in 5 years under a negative interest rate policy, one would think the Swedish Central Bank (Riksbank) would be seeking to prudently manage its asset book on the basis of appropriate risk/reward as opposed to lecturing Australia and Canada on their respective carbon footprints. What we are witnessing is yet another discrete move by authorities to manipulate markets based on fantasy rather than fact.  The hypocrisy is extreme as we shall discover.

While the Riksbank should have complete freedom in how it wishes to deploy capital, we should view this is a pathetic sop to the cabal at the European Central Bank (ECB). Since when did central bankers become experts on climate change? The RBA is no better. Deputy Governor, Guy Debelle, gave a speech in March 2019 on the risks posed by climate change which based prophecies on the data accident-prone IPCC and Bureau of Meteorology. Why not seek balance? Easier to fold to group think so as not to be outed as a pariah. Utterly gutless. Our own APRA is also pushing this ridiculous agenda on climate change reporting. It is willful negligence.

While it is true that on a per capita basis, Australia and Canada’s emissions are higher than the global average, why doesn’t the Riksbank give us credit for lowering that amount 11.4% since 2000? Even Canada has reduced its carbon emissions by 7.3% over the last 18 years. Admittedly Sweden’s emissions per capita have fallen 21.9% according to the IEA. Greta will be happy.

Why hasn’t the Riksbank taken China or India to task for their 169.9% or 94.7% growth in CO2 emissions respectively? There are plenty of oil-producing nations – Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Oman that have worse per capita outcomes than Australia or Canada. Do these countries get special dispensation from the wrath of the Riksbank? Clearly.

The US has pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord. If the US has marginally lower emissions per capita (15.74t/CO2-e) than Australia (16.45t/CO2-e), isn’t a double standard to write,

The conditions for active climate consideration are slightly better in our work with the foreign exchange reserves. To ensure that the foreign exchange reserves fulfil their purpose, they need to consist of assets that can be rapidly converted to money even when the markets are not functioning properly. Our assessment is that the foreign exchange reserves best correspond to this need if they consist of 75 per cent US government bonds, 20 per cent German and 5 per cent British, Danish and Norwegian government bonds.

Essentially Riksbank commitment to climate change is conditional. The US which is responsible for 13.8% of global emissions can be 75% of holdings. Australia at 1.3% can’t. No doubt sacrificing Queensland Treasury Corp, WA Treasury Corp and Albertan bonds from a Riksbank balance sheet perspective will have little impact on the total. In short, it looks to be pure tokenism. The Riksbank has invested around 8% of its foreign exchange reserves in Australian and Canadian central and federal government bonds. So perhaps at the moment, it is nothing but substitution from state to federal. Why not punish NSW TCorp for being part of a state that has 85%+ coal-fired power generation?

At the very least the Riksbank admits its own hypocrisy.

The Riksbank needs to develop its work on how to take climate change into consideration in asset management. For instance, we need a broader and deeper analysis of the issuers’ climate footprint. At the same time, one must remember that the foreign exchange reserves are unavoidably dominated by US and German government bonds. The Riksbank’s contribution to a better development of the climate will, therefore, remain small. This is entirely natural. The important decisions on how climate change should be counteracted in Sweden are political and should be taken by the government and the Riksdag (parliament).

Still, what hope have we got when Benoît Cœuré, member of the Executive Board of the ECB, lecturing those on “Scaling up Green Finance: The Role of Central Banks.” He noted,

2018 has seen one of the hottest summers in Europe since weather records began. Increasing weather extremes, rising sea levels and the Arctic melting are now clearly visible consequences of human-induced warming. Climate change is not a theory. It is a fact.

Reading more of this report only confirms the commitment of the ECB to follow the UN’s lead and deliberately look to misallocate capital based on unfounded claims of falling crop yields and rising prices (the opposite is occurring) and rising hurricane and drought activity (claims that even the IPCC has admitted there is little or no evidence by climate change). Sweden is merely being a well-behaved schoolboy.

Cœuré made the explicit claim, “The ECB, together with other national central banks of the Eurosystem, is actively supporting the European Commission’s sustainable finance agenda.

CM thinks the biggest problem with this “agenda” is that it risks even further misallocation of capital within global markets already drowning in poorly directed investment. It isn’t hard to see what is going on here. It is nothing short of deliberate market manipulation by trying to increase the cost of funding to conventional energy using farcical concocted “climate risks” to regulate them out of existence.

Cœuré made this clear in his speech,

once markets and credit risk agencies price climate risks properly, the amount of collateralised borrowing counterparties can obtain from the ECB will be adjusted accordingly.

What do you know? On cue, Seeking Alpha notes,

Cutting €2bn of yearly investments, the European Union will stop funding oil, natural gas and coal projects at the end of 2021 as it aims to become the first climate-neutral continent.

All CM will say is best of luck with this decision. Just watch how this kneeling at the altar of the pagan god of climate change will completely ruin the EU economy. The long term ramifications are already being felt. The EU can’t escape the fact that 118mn of its citizens (up from 78m in 2007) are below the poverty line. That is 22% of the population. So why then does Cœuré mention, in spite of such alarming poverty, that taking actions (that will likely increase unemployment) will be helped by “migration [which] has contributed to dampening wage growth…in recent years, thereby further complicating our efforts to bring inflation back to levels closer to 2%.

Closer to home, the National Australia Bank (NAB) has joined in the groupthink by looking to phase out lending to thermal coal companies by 2035. The $760 million exposure will be cut in half by 2028. If climate change is such a huge issue why not look to end it ASAP? This is terrible governance.

Why not assess thermal coal companies on the merits of the industry’s future rather than have the acting-CEO Philip Chronican make a limp-wristed excuse that it is merely getting in line with the government commitment to Paris? If lending to thermal coal is good for shareholders in 2036, who cares what our emissions targets are (which continue to fall per capita)? Maybe this is industry and regulator working hand-in-hand?

The market has always been the best weighing mechanism for risk. Unfortunately, for the last two decades, global central bank policy has gone out of its way to prevent the market from clearing. Now it seems that the authorities are taking actions that look like collusion to bully the ratings agencies into marking down legitimate businesses that are being punished for heresy.

This will ironically only make them even better investments down the track when reality dawns, just as CM pointed out with anti-ESG stocks. Just expect the entry points to these stocks to be exceedingly cheap. Buy what the market hates. It looks as though the bureaucrats are set to make fossil fuel companies penny stocks.