Showing posts with label fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fraud. Show all posts

Thursday, November 4, 2021

Nina-Bytes: Last Call For Ivermectin Rubes in the Online Left

 


Editor's noteNina-Bytes is a weekday blogging series that features short analysis and commentary on articles from around the web.



Right Wing Health Care Providers Making Millions Off Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin

Over the past few weeks on Nina-Bytes, we've briefly touched on various forms of pandemic profiteering and its fallout; a problem that clearly goes well beyond price gouging and speaks to the fundamental neofeudalist transformation our society is undergoing as we speak. Today I thought I'd stay on theme by examining recent news that the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis is launching an investigation into two right wing propaganda groups for pushing bunk Covid treatments. Amazingly enough, this investigation is primarily the result of journalism published in Time Magazine, and facts revealed in this September 28th, 2021 story by Micah Lee, over on The Intercept.

In that article, Lee details how two (extremely) right wing-aligned organizations, America’s Frontline Doctors and telemedicine provider SpeakWithAnMD.com, raked in millions of dollars shucking ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and bogus online consultations. Delving into the politics of these organizations, Lee adds:


"America’s Frontline Doctors, which debuted in the summer of 2020, has close ties to a network of right-wing efforts to undermine public health during the pandemic, including the Tea Party Patriots. AFLDS’s founder, physician Simone Gold, was arrested and charged after the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. She and other doctors have appeared in widely shared videos arguing that the drugs hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin — which are primarily used to treat malaria in humans and parasitic worms in livestock, respectively — are effective treatments for Covid-19, despite warnings from the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention against using them.

The extremely partisan group also misleads people about Covid-19 vaccines, which they refer to as “experimental biological agents,” and against public health measures like vaccine mandates, masking, social distancing, and restrictions on businesses. In a video titled “The Truth About Covid-19 Vaccines,” which has received over 1.3 million views, Gold falsely argues that Covid-19 is not very deadly and that the vaccines are more dangerous than the virus itself. Over 690,000 Americans so far have died from the virus, and unvaccinated people now make up 99 percent of recent Covid-19 deaths."


Frankly I could quote the entire article, but the short story here is that the whole bloody thing is a scam to sell bunk medicine to sick people; and it's a scam with reactionary political overtones at that. In fact, when it comes to ivermectin in particular, this isn't even a new scam; Trump himself ran this same game with hydroxychloroquine all the way back in 2020. 

Now maybe that doesn't surprise you; it probably shouldn't, given the popularity of vaccine fearmongering and ivermectin on the openly fascist Fox News network. Unfortunately as anyone in the online left who hasn't been living in a cave for the past year can tell you, this news will come as a shock to a lot of people who really should have known better. Lead by faux-left pied piper reactionaries, online leftism has developed a massive anti-vax crank problem; one that doesn't appear to be vanishing even as the anti-vax movement itself disintegrates.

The mainstream media doesn't seem very interested in this story, and I don't have a lot of faith in the power of Congress to stop fascist culture war tactics at this point. As a member of the online left however, I need to ask the people around me if they're paying attention as this whole grift unravels? I don't know, and frankly I don't care why folks who think they're leftists signed up for reactionary anti-vax nonsense, but surely at the point you're following guys who hawk horse deworming paste alongside some of the worst nazis on the internet, it's time to reconsider your position, isn't it? 

If it isn't, maybe it's time you stopped calling yourself a leftist and just got on with your new life campaigning for "populists" like Josh Hawley.


- nina illingworth

 

Anarcho-syndicalist writer, critic and analyst.

You can find my work at ninaillingworth.comCan’t You ReadMedia Madness and my Patreon Blog

Updates available on TwitterInstagramMastodon and Facebook.

Podcast at “No Fugazi” on Soundcloud.

Inquiries and requests to speak to the manager @ASNinaWrites

Chat with fellow readers online at Anarcho Nina Writes on Discord!

“It’s ok Willie; swing heil, swing heil…”

 



Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Article Analysis: Fake Polls & the Anti Bernie Narrative in the Media


Editor's note: over the past few years I've done literally everything in my power not to duplicate content across multiple websites but I've finally reached the point where social media censorship is forcing my hand. The following informal article analysis essay originally appeared on Facebook, but since that company is currently (and obviously) throttling how many views my account gets until I give them money - I'm forced to re-post it here:

--
The vast majority of the time I post a focused article analysis piece on Facebook it's because I'm looking to highlight glaringly obvious mistakes in the mainstream media's coverage. Today I thought I'd switch gears and take a look at this delightful piece of low budget independent journalism by Ashok Koyi on his website which appears to be called "the Kalinga" - Koyi drills deeper into a recent Iowa 2020 Democratic Party primary poll that got a lot of mainstream media play and discovers that not all is what it seems.

You can find the article here: 


With the important note that Ashok's article appears to be the result of multiple Twitter sleuths (two of which he credits at the bottom of the piece) I'd like to start by noting that I agree with almost everything the author states in this piece. Furthermore the investigative methodology is sound and the conclusion Koyi draws from his investigation of the people behind this poll is completely inarguable - namely that this isn't so much a "poll" as a mainstream liberal Frankenstein memo designed to manufacture the narrative that Iowa is going for Biden or Warren and Sanders is doomed.

In particular I encourage readers to please note the following paragraph taken from Koyi's report:

"The most important aspect being
"Binder specializes in qualitative rather than quantitative research. His focus is on assessing subjective factors such as language, emotion, and attitudes."
To me, all this word salad means only one thing. It means he mind-reads potential voters when conducting his polling. In simple terms the polls capture his feelings of voter’s feelings about politicians
I have never heard a worse way to describe a pollster than this. Given that only the memo is published without the underlying dataset, I am assuming that this poll is based on the feelings of David Binder staff about which democratic candidate gets what percentage of votes in Iowa in the upcoming democratic primary election"

This analysis is dead-bang on and although the author is generous enough to allow for the possibility that this isn't a mockery of traditional polling, I am not so kind - the poll in question is clearly paid for propaganda designed to discourage Sanders supporters and hopefully keep them from voting for Bernie in the primary.

This of course brings up the larger issue of the rise in paid polling outfits that operate like public relations and marketing firms over roughly the past decade. As anyone familiar with the Koch-backed climate change denial industry can attest, it is now possible for literally anyone at all to hire a polling company to produce a poll that manufactures whatever specific narrative you like. Typically this will be accomplished with some combination of leading or ambiguous questions or carefully targeting polling by a region's average annual income - who can forget the CNN poll upon which Biden's case as an "unassailable front-runner" was built up in the media, including in particular and to the surprise of no one, CNN! What was only mentioned on Right Wing News sites however is the fact that the polling company somehow managed not to sample a "statistically significant" number of 18-49 year olds who probably wouldn't have been all that jazzed about Biden.

The simple truth is that "he who pays the piper, calls the tune" and while political campaigns demand accuracy from their internal polling contractors, they are not above hiring what amounts to PR firms like Focus on Rural America and the company of its founder, Link Strategies, to manufacture a specific narrative in the media. These results are then fed to influential figures in the public discourse and you've essentially created the idea that Bernie is finished and Warren is ascendant out of nothing. Now traditionally, the mainstream media has been considered a safeguard against spurious polling because they not only sponsor a number of polls that are in theory designed to be accurate, but they also publish the methodology behind those polls when they release him. What happens however when the mainstream corporate media itself is now controlled by politically active billionaire titans of industry like say, Jeff Bezos? What happens when massive American corporate media companies are the ones paying the piper, and the tune they want to hear is that Bernie loses? Well, in this case what clearly happened is a B.S. poll designed to suppress pro-Sanders turnout in Iowa got treated seriously in the mainstream media for a few days; whether or not it actually stops Iowans from voting Sanders in five months is less clear - but that is certainly the intent of the exercise.

Look, this is big business and these folks will go to any length to rig even meaningless internet polls - good examples include Trump fixer Michael Cohen hiring an IT firm to try and rig a GOP nomination contest Drudge Poll or the weirdo Pelosi fanboys over at Daily Kos rigging weekly forum polls against Sanders by banning almost every Bernie supporter during the 2016 election. Obviously there is a certain amount of value in using rigged polls to suggest a political narrative and clearly it's fairly effective.

Who watches the watchmen when the watchmen have all been bought?

Go back and read Koyi's report at the top of this article again and ask yourself how many people are going to bother to take the roughly ten steps it takes Ashok to figure out this "poll" is utter nonsense, before they decide to believe it or not?

Right, the answer is "almost nobody."

As I've written numerous times since the real Democratic Party 2020 nomination fight kicked off just before Christmas in 2018, the mainstream corporate media, the Democratic Party and rich liberal elites are prepared to do anything, say anything and push any narrative to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning the Dem nomination - precisely *because* they know that he will beat Trump.

Since that time, the Manhattan Island media and Beltway Think Tank glitterati have rotated through a seemingly never ending cast of "Bernie Slayer" ascendant candidates who had supposedly already rendered Sanders and his revolution irrelevant. One by one Lock Em Up Kamala, Trapper Keeper, Skateboard Jesus and Dollar Store Macron have fallen by the wayside only moments after the establishment media told you they were in the driver's seat. Now Palooka Joe Biden is in the act of falling on his sword and a newly conciliatory Liz Warren is hanging out with Wall Street executives and Hillary Clinton - you'd have to be a complete idiot not to see what's going on here at this point.

The narrative that the Bernie Sanders political revolution is already dead will never die, so long as the Bernie Sanders political revolution continues to live - the fact that they're still paying media minions and fake pollster gurus to tell you Sanders doesn't stand a chance is all the evidence you need to demonstrate he's still in the race and the fight is not over.

As always in life, it's important to "consider the source" and the source of all this anti-Bernie mainstream media coverage are companies owned by rich people who'd rather lose to a fascist like Trump, than share with the labor class under a Democratic Socialist like Sanders.

- Nina Illingworth

Monday, May 20, 2019

Distant Early Warning



One of the first lessons most self-supporting labor class adults learn in life is the importance of vigilantly cleaning up after oneself; after all, once you're out on your own in the world, nobody is going to do it for you. For most of us, the apathy, inattentiveness and delay of today, will invariably come back to bite us in the backside tomorrow - and I'm as much a prisoner of this reality as anyone else who actually works for a living. Thus after procrastinating for the first three weeks of May, I finally paid the piper and spent most of this past weekend doing a little housekeeping; both in a very literal sense, and in terms of getting some long-brewing observations and criticisms off my chest over on my Patreon blog. During that time, I also wrapped up my six part look at Matt Taibbi's 2010 anti-Wall Street masterpiece "Griftopia: A Story of Bankers, Politicians, and the Most Audacious Power Grab in American History“ - you can find that article (and links to the previous five installments) here.

I mention this now because throughout all of my writing about Griftopia, I've consciously attempted to highlight what I feel is the enduring takeaway from the book: the persistent culture of overt criminality in the global financial industry and the complicity of bought-and-paid-for gate guardians who continue to enable that criminality. Although it is not commonly understood, the truth is that  decades of deregulation, state-subsidized conglomeration and the absolute dominance of American financial institutions have turned the entire global economy into a sort of ponzi scheme - a rigged game where market profits are privatized, while the losses are passed on to the people in a system that serves to funnel untold trillions of dollars from public coffers directly into the pockets of elite investors and banking institutions. Once you understand this you start to see the 2008 financial crisis for what it truly was; not a "thousand year flood" but rather a predictable (and reoccurring) side effect of allowing largely unaccountable mega-banks to gamble freely with other people's money

In other words - it's not really a question of "if" there will be another financial crisis, by rather a question of when the bubble is going to pop and precisely who will be holding the bag when it comes time to pay off Wall Street's gambling debts. That's why stories like this May 15, 2019 piece by Pam and Russ Martens over at Wall Street on Parade should gravely concern you:


JPMorgan Chase Owns $2.2 Trillion in Stock Derivatives; Two-Thirds the Total for All Banks



I'm sorry; did I accidentally say this article should merely concern you? As it turns out, that was a grossly negligent understatement - what I meant is that this article should scare the living sh*t out of you. Unfortunately because it's written by financial industry observers for an audience of banking scandal junkies who're extremely plugged into "the Street" it may not be readily apparent to the casual observer why all of this is extremely bad. Let's look at some individual quotes from the article which I'll try to place in context, before looking to sum up the situation in layman's terms at the end:

"According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the regulator of national banks, as of December 31, 2018 JPMorgan Chase Bank NA (the Federally-insured bank backstopped by U.S. taxpayers) held $2,212,311,000,000 ($2.2 trillion) in equity derivatives. Equity is another name for stock. The OCC also reported that all commercial banks in the U.S. held a total of $3.374 trillion in equity derivatives at the end of last year, meaning that for some very strange reason, JPMorgan Chase holds a 65.5 percent market share of bank trading in this derivatives market.
Those trillion dollar figures are notional amounts, meaning the face value. The OCC defines “notional” like this: “The notional amount of a derivative contract is a reference amount that determines contractual payments, but it is generally not an amount at risk. The credit risk in a derivative contract is a function of a number of variables, such as whether counterparties exchange notional principal, the volatility of the underlying market factors…, the maturity and liquidity of the contract, and the creditworthiness of the counterparty.”

Translation: one of the largest banks on the planet has 2.2 trillion dollars worth of potentially sketchy stock derivatives parked in its regular banking portfolio; effectively meaning JPMorgan Chase is gambling with a metric f*ck ton of money that's insured by the U.S. government. This is not an auspicious start, but onward we go:

"According to the OCC report, JPMorgan Chase lost $644 million on its equity positions in the fourth quarter of 2018. We don’t yet know what happened in the first quarter of this year because the OCC has not yet released its report.

Not only is JPMorgan Chase Bank NA engaging in risky stock derivative trades, but according to the OCC just 31 percent of these trades are centrally cleared. The other 69 percent are what are called over-the-counter or OTC derivative trades, meaning they are “bilateral,” or secret contracts between JPMorgan Chase and a counterparty with little daylight available to Federal regulators. That also would suggest that they are highly illiquid."

Here we discover three things; the massively overexposed bank is in fact already losing a significant amount of money on these risky wagers, the majority of these trades are being conducted with zero regulatory oversight and there's good reason to believe the underlying stock derivatives themselves are junk. This is all starting to feel a little familiar:

"At this point, we should pause for a moment to explain what a “derivative” actually is. The OCC defines it this way: “A financial contract in which the value is derived from the performance of underlying market factors, such as interest rates, currency exchange rates, commodity, credit, and equity prices.”

Another definition of a derivative might be this: a type of trade where Wall Street mega banks, with far superior market knowledge from trillions of bits of internal trading data, can sell sh**t packaged as a solid investment to the dumb tourists who manage public pensions, municipal funds, and school district bond issuance, to name just a few. We apologize for the pejorative “dumb tourist,” but compared to the Ph.D. computer geeks, artificial intelligence software, and algorithmic trading that dominate Wall Street trading floors, we’re all dumb tourists. (See JPMorgan Employs 30,000 Programmers.)"

Yeap, the derivatives are dogsh*t and to make matters worse, these risky bets are almost certainly being pushed on small time institutional investors who represent cities, towns, school districts and working class retirees or hopeful retirees. If this isn't at least starting to give you a sense of déjà vu, you certainly haven't been clicking on the links as we go.

As bad as all of that is however, we're still looking at a situation which is merely alarming, predatory and immoral. Sure, JPMorgan Chase has accepted $2.2 trillion worth of obfuscated, unregulated and absurdly complex wagers on volatile stock markets through a bank that's backed up by public funds. Yes, the bank has packaged those bets into an undesirable investment vehicle to theoretically offset a potential loss. Yes, these risky derivatives are crappy and yes, it's objectively sh*tty that Jamie Dimon is pawning them off on complicit yokel government administrators and pension fund managers whose clients likely believe their investments are much safer than they are. So far, that's a pretty sad story for working class retirees but it hardly rates as "iceberg ahead" for the global economy. For things to get really out of hand here, the bigwigs at JPMorgan Chase would have to be making uniquely awful, insanely risky bets that are going to explode long before they can pass the risk on to children and the elderly. What are the odds of that eerily familiar situation coming up again this time? Let's turn back to the article and find out.     

At this point in the piece, the authors go into a thorough discussion about the 2012 "London Whale scandal" which is certainly worth reading in its own right. This is however a recap, not a reprint so I'll just sum up the important things you need to know here: several years after the financial crisis, this exact same bank, with this exact same CEO, "was caught trading exotic derivatives in London to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and ended up losing at least $6.2 billion of depositors’ money." The bank (including Jamie Dimon) also appear to have engaged in a little "open fraud" in an effort to cover up their massive losses; all of which earned JPMorgan Chase a $920 million fine in the fall of 2013. How bad was it? From the article:

"Senator Carl Levin, who chaired the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations at the time, said JPMorgan Chase “piled on risk, hid losses, disregarded risk limits, manipulated risk models, dodged oversight, and misinformed the public. (Is that really a bank you want involved in $2.2 trillion of stock derivatives, 69 percent of which are shrouded in darkness?)”   

Well isn't that just lovely? In answer to the author's above question, no that is almost certainly not the type of trading you want the largest federally insured bank in America conducting; especially in light of their objectively criminal history and the laughably permissible regulatory environment Wall Street is operating in under the Trump administration.

Naturally, this terrifying story gets even worse the further you dig:

"Now that Wall Street banks have a deregulatory regime in the White House, it is only natural to wonder if the cowboys are back in charge of trading at JPMorgan Chase. On that point, the OCC reports that at the height of the financial crisis in the fourth quarter of 2008, equity derivative contracts held by commercial banks totaled just $737 billion, or just 22 percent of the $3.374 trillion today, of which JPMorgan controls two-thirds." 

Excellent, so that means the problem is almost certainly more than big enough to sink the entire global economy and absolutely nobody in a position to do anything about it gives a flying f*ck! Don't run away just yet my friends, because the good times just keep on rolling here:

"Adding to the concerns of what’s going on at JPMorgan Chase, is the question as to why the bank isn’t using the multitude of exchange-traded products available to take positions in the stock market, like the popular and liquid futures contract on the Standard and Poor’s 500 index, and why it isn’t making the trades in its investment bank instead of its Federally-insured commercial bank.

The troublesome answer is likely contained in this article at Risk.net which names JPMorgan the “equity derivatives house of the year.” If you read the article to the end, it becomes clear that JPMorgan Chase is customizing (known as “bespoke” contracts) equity derivatives in large amounts and with highly complex terms."

So you caught that right? The largest, most corrupt and "too big to fail" bank in America is almost certainly running massive, volatile, absurdly complex and largely unsupervised "prop bets" on the stock market through its federally insured depository arm, precisely because they're mindbogglingly risky investments. If the bank's "bespoke" wagers pay then the profits go to Jamie Dimon's investors; if on the other hand they bust, then potentially everyone on the planet loses - that is, everyone except the folks at JPMorgan Chase who custom built this financial time bomb in the first place.

Of course, the really f*cked up part about all of this is the fact that playing Russian roulette with the global economy because it'll be pensioners and the public treasury that eats the bullet if you lose, probably isn't illegal - and if it is illegal, you can be damn sure nobody is ever going to jail for it regardless.

Then again maybe I'm wrong; maybe the real icing on this whole sh*tcake is the fact that the US corporate media apparently doesn't consider this stupefyingly awful news even worthy of a blog post. I guess when it comes to screwing over the proles for fun and profit, corporate America really is as "thick as thieves."


- Nina Illingworth



Independent writer, critic and analyst with a left focus.

You can find my work at ninaillingworth.com, Can’t You Read, Media Madness and my Patreon Blog.

Updates available on Twitter and Facebook.