Category: Uncategorized

“Veritas”… Will Have To Wait, For A Speaking Indictment — To Learn More: USDC Mag. Judge.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

So it seems pretty clear that all Project Veritas (and James O’Keefe) really want to do, at bottom, here — is distract from the fact that… they are caught. Again — in one of their ill-thought out schemes. But this time, it looks like felonies were committed.

The boys were hoping to learn “early” who all (some of whom are or were likely inside Project Veritas’ own inner circle) turned on them. Who dimed them out.

But that will not happen — as an able USDC Magistrate decided today. That’s a 19 page published opinion, out of Manhattan. Here’s a bit:

…Judge Torres also addressed the Nov. 19 Motion on the merits, and found that Project Veritas and O’Keefe “‘cite[] no precedent — and the Court is aware of no authority — for the proposition that the Fourth Amendment (or any other constitutional or statutory provision) gives a person who has not been charged a right to review a search warrant affidavit during an ongoing investigation….’”

[T]he Court [also] is attentive to the fact that the Government is investigating potential criminal activity relating to the transmission of personal information about a private citizen, who happens to be the daughter of President Biden. In Amodeo II, the Second Circuit noted that “[c]ourts have long declined to allow public access simply to cater ‘to a morbid craving for that which is sensational and impure.’” 71 F.3d at 1051 (quoting In re Caswell, 18 R.I. 835, 836 (1893)).

The Second Circuit thus reminded district courts that they “have the power to insure that their records are not ‘used to gratify private spite or promote public scandal,’ and have ‘refused to permit their files to serve as reservoirs of libelous statements for press consumption.’” Id. (quoting Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598). While the Court does not suggest that RCFP’s interest is of a prurient character, it does note that, given the details about Ms. Biden’s personal information included in the Materials, “the privacy interests of innocent third parties” — including the victim of the alleged criminal activity — is an important countervailing factor against granting public access. Amodeo II, 71 F.3d at 1050–51 (internal citation omitted)….

So the affidavits will not be unsealed. Not at least until well-after the speaking indictment is unsealed, and a standard DoJ press conference (and perhaps, perp walk) occurs.

Sorry O’Keefe — you’re “Coo-coo for Cocoa Puffs,” now.

Out — grinning….

Assuming That DWAC Can Get This Launched — Before An SEC Investigation Eats It Alive…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

…Then, one thing seems blindingly obvious, now (and a small silver lining, actually):

All the money the Mercers poured into Parler, and all the other donations made to launch far-right Gab.com… will go… poof.

Both of these rival services will have to fold, if Tangerine does get his ironic “Truth” network up and running, at some point in early to mid-2022.

Of course, Devin Nunes was likely to lose his seat in California due to fairer district mapping, there. So, he was going to be unemployed, anyway. But as CEO, it will be fascinating to see how long the company can survive, without “eating its own“.

There certainly won’t be enough volume to sustsain three hard right hate sites, in perpetuity.

And the two most likely to fold first, will be Gab, followed closely by… Parler.

Delicious. Even without the other two on the field, any longer… I will bet that Tangerine’s offering will fold… within five years.

Lovely. Out, grinning.

[U, For “EF Hutton” History] Tangerine’s PIPE Is Investigated By SEC; Claims It Will Have More PAID Users Than Voters By 2026…

~ condor ~ 1 Comment

Tangerine’s social media/cable enterprise SPAC deal (I refuse to give any of their silly graphics any play here) is looking pretty… dicey. The claim is this will be bigger than Netflix or Disney+. Hilarious.

First, most of the people identified as “key leaders / management” on page 21, here… won’t list their last names — presumably since (once he craters) they will be… unemployable, elsewhere (for having backed what is clearly a malignant, anti-free and fair US elections propaganda machine).

Next — he expects to garner 20% more PAYING users, at over $13/month, by 2026 — than voted for him (whilst paying nothing, for “the privilege” of following him on Twitter — again, paying nothing, in 2020) — at page 38.

Finally, and almost trivially — given the above wildly stupid ideas, the SEC and FINRA are requesting documents (see Item 8.01 here), about who knew what, when — and the two are scrutinizing the trading volumes prior to the announced deal with Tangerine — at DWAC. Seems clear there were potentially criminal (felony) tippees trading, based on undisclosed inside material information, immediately prior.

UPDATED — the deal is supposedly being run by an entity using the old logos of “EF Hutton” — again, I will not feature deceptive images of that, as a stand-alone. I will note that it appears the brand was bought by three guys at a place called Benchmark Investments, LLC, for an undisclosed amount. The original “when Hutton speaks… people listen” company (along with its founders) went bankrupt, and are… and have been long dead (since the early 2000s).

No, these are three small time brokers — trading on an old brand-name (which they bought), that gullible retirees in Alabama and Kansas might (wrongly) assume is a continuation of the original old and generally venerable company. Nope. Just three turks — in decidedly shiny suits, out of Georgia.

We will keep an eye on this set of now SEC filed preliminary prospectuses (as amended from time to time — raising a potential $1 billion in new money) — as it all portends to be an epic tragi-comedy. Onward, grinning.

The Staggeringly LETHAL Cost — Of Blithely Believing Mis-Information, On REAL Bio-Science…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

In matters of pandemic arrest / abatement, the trafficking in lies, or even just dubious information… clearly has lethal consequences. [While death rates nationwide are generally declining, it remains deeply troubling (to me at least) that so many are obviously dying… needlessly.]

Here’s the scoop: NPR has just completed a post-hoc study, of the reddest-, versus the bluest-1,000 US county level COVID deaths related data. To be clear, this is not about causation, from voting GOP. This is about correlation.

That said, it seems inescapable that low vaccination rates in the reddest counties are being driven by belief in misinformation. And it seems equally clear that CDC messaging on vaccines is most widely accepted in the bluest counties. And, so — death clusterings… follow those boluses / trends (see at above) — and read this:

…NPR looked at deaths per 100,000 people in roughly 3,000 counties across the U.S. from May 2021, the point at which vaccinations widely became available. People living in counties that went 60% or higher for Trump in November 2020 had 2.7 times the death rates of those that went for Biden. Counties with an even higher share of the vote for Trump saw higher COVID-19 mortality rates.

In October, the reddest tenth of the country saw death rates that were six times higher than the bluest tenth, according to Charles Gaba, an independent health care analyst who’s been tracking partisanship trends during the pandemic and helped to review NPR’s methodology. Those numbers have dropped slightly in recent weeks, Gaba says: “It’s back down to around 5.5 times higher….”

I am genuinely puzzled as to how people like Candace Owens-Farmer and Alex Jones. . . are able to sleep at night, in view of the above. Puzzled — and immensely saddened, that so many people are so… unflinchingly… gullible. To an increasingly lethal set of outcomes. Onward, just the same. Ever… onward.

नमस्ते

Sunday Morning Backgrounder: The SECOND Reason I Think Pfizer’s AND Merck’s Covid Pills Will See “About Even” Deployments…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

While the Pfizer pill is (in smaller-scale studies) showing better risk-of-hospitalization data [or, greater efficacy, of one prefers] than Merck’s, it should be noted that most people, in ordinary clinical settings, who contract the more/most dangerous forms of the COVID symptoms often have multiple other health issues — which is (in part) why it can become so dangerous.

This in turn, leads to a quandry — with the Pfizer pill: it will likely require a “co-dosing” with an older HIV drug, one that more generally slows ALL drugs’ break-downs, inside the human body. But that co-dosed drug also interacts negatively with many common medications.

So, if the patient is on high blood pressure medications, or on a renal drug, the Pfizer pill may not be suitable for a COVID viral outbreak, as it might cause wild swings in the dosing profile of these other meds, in that patient’s body. Merck’s Lagevrio® does not face this issue (due to a relatively-slight difference in chemical structure) — so in these sicker, more “highly (other) medicated” Covid patients, it will more often be the drug of choice to avoid added risk of Covid hospitalizations. Here is some of the later learning, on it all:

…[“A] requirement for Pfizer’s antiviral pill to be taken with ritonavir, a drug used to treat HIV, would make the treatment unsuitable for many people with pre-existing medical conditions, he added.

“Ritonavir, which has been used in HIV therapy for many years, is a drug that specifically inhibits the ability of the body to break down medicines,” said [Merck’s] Barr. “The problem is that it’s incredibly non-specific. So there’s a whole host of medicines that people take, especially those medicines, unfortunately, that are associated with conditions that confer risk.”

A study published in the scientific journal Nature last week identified a “high overall frequency” of drug-to-drug interactions in high-risk Covid-19 patients in Spain treated with the antiviral drug lopinavir and ritonavir while in hospital. Such interactions were “alarmingly overlooked in the setting of the Covid-19 healthcare crisis,” concluded the authors of the study….

So we should be confident that in younger, otherwise healthy people who get severe forms of Covid symptoms, the Pfizer pill will clearly be the go-to choice (i.e., a fairly unusual population of patients), but in cases where the sickest patients are on multiple other meds — Merck’s pill will likely be prescribed. Smiling — into a quiet Sunday’s fog, here… be excellent to one another.

नमस्ते

I Wanted To Have This Gathered In One Place…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

Candace Owens-Farmer lost her defamation suit against Zuck almost six months ago.

But her fundraising site remains active for it. No appeal of the summary dismissal was filed, and she lost because there was no set of facts she could prove that would have allowed her recovery. In sum, the things called out as untrue (and posted by her)… were untrue, in Zuck’s fact checking.

Look — I dislike Zuck, too… but this is some dumb-level grift, now — at Xmas.

I imagine the amounts still rolling in are very small, but it is supremely… ironic that she is grifting off a suit for “defamation” against Zuck — by defaming him, in saying he lied about her.

It Would Seem Clear That James O’Keefe — And His Project “Veritas” — Will Not Be Able To Permanently Keep The New York State Temporary “Prior Restraint” Ruling.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

We were waiting for this — last night — but got distracted by the “Flight of the Crumbleys” drama (see prior reporting).

In any event, Mr. O’Keefe — a long time right-wing political spying creeper, and a well-known fraudster… is about to see his short trip in the Sun… draw to an embarrassing close. He cannot stop real journalists from publishing — not here in America. At most, he may collect damages, but only after the fact (of publishing) — if the reporting is libelous, or otherwise violates local law. He will be unable to prove any of that. So… he loses, and soon — thus (a very cogent Cahill, Gordon six pager, on how the law actually works, here):

…Project Veritas’s proposed remedy is, under well-settled law, an unconstitutional prior restraint on journalism. Project Veritas argues only that a statute, CPLR 3103(c), permits that prior restraint no matter what the Constitution says. That, of course, is not how the law works.

Prior restraints on journalism bear a “heavy presumption of constitutional invalidity,” National Broadcasting Co. v. Cooperman, 116 A.D.2d 287, 290 (2d Dep’t 1986), and are “the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 559 (1976). Not surprisingly, the only cases to address the clash between the First Amendment’s near-total ban on prior restraints and the attorney-client privilege unequivocally hold that prior restraints are not permitted, even when the material at issue is protected by the attorney-client privilege. See, e.g., Nicholson v. Keyspan Corp., 836 N.Y.S.2d 501 (Table), 2007 WL 641414, at *6 (Sup. Ct. of Suffolk Cnty. Feb. 28, 2007)….

Onward, but this dime-store hood will be run out of court — federal and state… and perhaps liable for $750,000 in opposing counsels’ legal fees… to the NYT. And that will make me smile, and smile… widely.

नमस्ते

As I Said, Merck’s Lagevrio® (molnupiravir) Will Be Fine…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

I will not belabor this at any length, as both pills will be ordered in massive quantities, globally — unless and until it is definitively shown that they won’t work, at all, against Omicron or some future variant (unlikely in the extreme).

Here is the latest (by Tweet, no less), though both versions have yet to clear Canada’s version fo the FDA, called Health Canada.

…NEW: Procurement minister @FilomenaTassi announces Canada is buying 1 million COVID anti-viral pills from @pfizer and 500k from @Merck, with option for up to 500k more. This is pending approval by Health Canada….

Okay — do be excellent to one another. I’m off the clock, now….

नमस्ते

[U: Fugitives?!] When A Dad Leaves A 9 mm Sig-Sauer Semi-Automatic Pistol, UNLOCKED — With Ammo — “Inside The Orbit” Of An Awkward 15 Year Old Boy, With Emotional Problems…

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

This may be slightly controversial, but in my opinion, it is entirely appropriate to charge these parents with involuntary manslaughter. [In my estimation, it is only “controversial” because we have (collectively) so rarely enforced these laws, as written — against parents. But today, that changes.]

Despite what will ultimately be impotent, and irrational howling from the far-right, and the gun lobby (but I repeat myself) — this may be the only way to stem school shootings by students: start holding their parents accountable, at least in cases of gross negligence / willful indifference, and in cases where local gun safety laws were plainly ignored, by these same parents. Here’s the latest:

…Prosecutors in Michigan took a rare step on Friday by filing involuntary manslaughter charges against the parents of the 15-year-old accused of fatally shooting four students in the halls of Oxford High School, according to court documents.

The office of Karen D. McDonald, the prosecutor in Oakland County, filed four charges of involuntary manslaughter against James and Jennifer Crumbley, one for each of the students killed.

Law enforcement authorities say that Mr. Crumbley legally bought the 9-millimeter Sig Sauer handgun four days before his son used it to carry out the country’s deadliest school shooting this year. Hours before the attack, he and his wife met with school officials who were concerned about their son’s behavior.

It is unclear how their son, Ethan, obtained the handgun and brought it to school. But law enforcement authorities say he walked out of a school bathroom on Tuesday afternoon armed with the semiautomatic pistol and three 15-round magazines….

The state law in Michigan required that weapon to be locked separately from any ammo, and the keys to be kept away from any minor, unless directly being supervised by an adult. See, Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 750.235a*. It would seem clear that law was broken, as the father only purchased the gun a week earlier. And the son had it in school, when called to a counselling meeting with his parents at the school the morning of the killings. This senseless killing must end. We must end it.

And if ultimately jailing parents… who ignore the law (for up to fifteen years) is required to do that, then so be it. Onward.

नमस्ते

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

* Michigan also penalizes any person who, because of carelessness, recklessness or negligence… causes or allows any firearm under his or her immediate control to be discharged and kill or injure another person. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 752.861.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UPDATE @ 9:30 PM EST — And later this evening, there is a dispute about whether they are — or are not — felony fugitives from justice. Are they on the lam, or were they hiding for their own safety? Honestly. I. Don’t. Care.

You see — how this works is. . . when you are charged with felonies, law enforcement is free to come arrest you immediately, wherever they find you. The claim by their counsel is that they agreed to come in and be arraigned — if charged, and in return the DA would let them self-surrender. But the charges were announced. . . and poof!

As several hours passed, the defense lawyers admitted the couple was not replying to texts to come in, and surrender.

So the US Marshals and local police are conducting a fugitive hunt, as I type this, tonight. But their counsel says they will return to the area and come in voluntarily. It is likely too late for that, now. If they are found, on the road, they WILL be immediately arrested. There is a state wide alert out, for their black 2021 Kia Seltos SUV with the Michigan license plate number DQG 5203.

No, this is not like popping over to the precinct, “for tea”. . . they were overdue by this afternoon.

And so, a “slow white Bronco chase” may yet ensue. That is, wherever they are spotted, the arm of the law may catch up with them over the weekend — and in general, that will mean they will sit in the tank — until at least Monday midday arraignment.

It is also unlikely that the judge before whom they will ultimately appear to be arraigned will give them any credit, for any form of reasonably low bail — since s/he will not be inclined to believe the “we WERE on our way over for some tea, but got distracted” story.

Here’s the latest — but how clueless (as parents) do you have to be, to think it’s okay to go silent with a 15 year old son ALREADY charged as an adult — on four premeditated murder counts, and one terrorism count?

These two are. . . now in very deep. And deeper, by the minute — ever since they missed the Friday afternoon closing time, at the criminal court building in Oakland, Michigan — due to their own bad choices.

Namaste. . . so sad. And so. . . strange.

FINAL UPDATE — 2:45 AM Central: At about 2 AM EST, the Crumbleys’ black SUV was spotted on Detroit’s East Side. Within 20 minutes, the Crumbleys themselves were taken into custody — without incident, by US Marshals and Detroit’s finest.

Now. . . I can sleep.

After Watching Rosario Dawson And Michael Keaton In An Excellent Hulu Series — I’ve Found A Renewed Interest In the Sackler Family’s Probable Misuse Of The Bankruptcy Statute. So Too Has A USDC Judge In Manhattan.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

We may decide to follow this subsequent briefing closely now — on these challenges to the Sacklers’ final, non-personal bankruptcy-inducing settlement of all their liability for the US opioid crisis, while simultaneously avoiding any reduction in their life-styles — due to off-shoring over $10 billion, from 2008 to at least 2018. The family got all the protection of a “fresh-start” bankruptcy, but without the surrender of the bulk of their assets — as would any normal human debtor in bankruptcy (i.e., you and me — the “little people“). No, us little people, in most states (except Texas) would have only $6,000 to our name after a “fresh start”.

And so, as if on cue, an able USDC Judge in Manhattan is suddenly ready to look at whether this amounted to an abuse — by the Sacklers, personally — of the company called Purdue, and its trip through the bankruptcy courts. Here’s that order — from this very morning:

…SCHEDULE FOR FURTHER BRIEFING:

At the close of argument yesterday I invited the parties to weigh in in writing on a question I raised at the end of the day. Because it had been a long day, and because we had discussed so much, the question was inelegantly phrased.

The issue is this: In Metromedia, the Second Circuit cautioned against the approval of a release of third-party claims against a non-debtor because the granting of such releases is subject to abuse. And in Manville III, the Circuit indicated that the possibility of abuse was heightened in situations where the non-debtors condition their financial contribution to the debtor’s estate on such releases. In re Johns-Manville Corp., 517 F.3d 52, 66 (2d Cir. 2008). From 1995-2007, Purdue only “upstreamed” enough money to the Sacklers to allow them to pay taxes and retain a relatively modest dividend for themselves. According to information provided by the Debtor, the Sacklers used 90% of Purdue’s upstreamed earnings were used to pay taxes; just 10% of those distributions were retained by the family. Purdue kept the rest of its earnings in treasury.

From 2008-2018, this changed. During that period only 44% of the money that Purdue upstreamed to the Sacklers was needed to pay taxes on Purdue’s earnings. 56% of those distributions were retained by the family. This change — regardless of what occasioned it — resulted in Purdue’s having far less in its treasury when it declared bankruptcy than would have been the case had the family adhered to the prior distribution pattern.

I am struggling with whether this is something that a court can/should take into account in deciding whether the releases on which the Sacklers conditioned their financial contribution to the Debtors’ estate are “abusive” in the Metromedia/Manville III sense — especially in light of evidence in the record that the Sacklers were concerned about litigation risk during those later years and were being advised to adopt an “aggressive” plan of cash distribution during that period. I can’t find any guidance in prior cases because, as far as I can tell, nothing remotely similar happened in any prior case. And as I told you yesterday, I don’t think this has anything to do with whether the distributions to the Sacklers qualify as fraudulent conveyances.

I would very much appreciate your weighing in on this issue, both on its merits and on what it might mean in terms of the need for a remand to Judge Drain. As to the latter question, would your answer be different if there were a Stern v. Marshall problem (which is different from whether there is a subject matter jurisdiction problem — I think the Debtor has pretty much resolved that issue to my satisfaction)? Finally, while I doubt that there is much of anything that anyone has to say on the statutory authorization issue that has not already been said, if, after yesterday’s argument, you have thought of some new argument, feel free to bring it to my attention. I don’t need (or want) additional briefing on any other issue. I would appreciate having your thoughts by next Monday morning at 9 AM at the latest. I would like to promise you an opinion next week, but I simply cannot, although I will try.

Please bring me up to date on the various deadlines that are presently in force. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 12/1/2021)….

Well — this could be a real barn burner. [And, I am going to withhold any “shoot from the hip” analysis of today’s Supremes’ arguments. Let’s wait to see what a five-four majority opinion actually looks like.]

Onward — but sort of discouraging, to be sure….

नमस्ते