192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:15 pm
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2020/05/07/why-people-cling-to-conspiracy-theories-like-plandemic/#43261a75049b


coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:19 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Why People Cling To Conspiracy Theories Like ‘Plandemic’

Tell us why high powered media is so concerned, when you get the chance.
Quote:
This agenda-based film features contradictory evidence and false claims while being championed as a beacon of truth.”

Why does he stop there? Tell us what is false and why. He can't. Eh Beth does not step in unless the narrative sustains serious damage. When the propagandists get nervous the truth is not that far away.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:35 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.


First of all: just because Dr Judy blows her own horn does not make her a whistle blower.

Secondly: RFK Jr's own syblings are quite distressed by his anti-vax stance.

He and his wife lost a child after (but not because of) a vaccination. It is quite understandable how he and his wife might feel about their terrible loss on the terrible toll of losses the entire Kennedy family have been through. For you and others to use this tragic family to thump your thoroughly debunked beliefs is ghoulish and despicable.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-robert-f-kennedy-jr-distorted-vaccine-science1/

How Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Distorted Vaccine Science

His anti-vaccine credentials date back to 2005

By Seth Mnookin, STAT on January 11, 2017

How Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Distorted Vaccine Science
Credit: Spencer Platt Getty Images

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Tuesday that he will head up a panel on vaccine safety for Donald Trump.

The president-elect’s transition team spokeswoman later walked that back, saying that he is “exploring the possibility” of forming a panel on autism, but “no decisions have been made.”

Let’s hope Trump drops any idea of a vaccine panel headed by Kennedy. For more than a decade, Kennedy has promoted anti-vaccine propaganda completely unconnected to reality. If Kennedy’s panel leads to even a small decline in vaccine rates across the country, it will result in the waste of untold amounts of money and, in all likelihood, the preventable deaths of infants too young to be vaccinated.
Advertisement

That wasted money will largely affect public health departments, whose budgets are already strained. A 2010 study in Pediatrics calculated the public sector expenses of containing a measles outbreak in which 11 children were infected at $124,517, an average of more than $10,000 per infection. That’s not to say that families won’t be affected as well: During that outbreak, 48 children too young to be vaccinated had to be quarantined at an average cost of $775 per family; medical costs for one infant who was infected were close to $15,000.

But those costs pale into comparison to the loss that will be felt by families who lose children to vaccine-preventable diseases, which typically strike when children are infected while still too young to be vaccinated.

Take pertussis, more commonly known as whooping cough. There have been several dramatic spikes in pertussis infections in the past decade, and in 2012 there were 48,277 reported cases in the US—the most since 1955. More than 87 percent of all of the country’s pertussis deaths from 2000 to 2014 were in infants younger than 3 months, which meant they were too young to have gotten their first pertussis shot.

Kennedy made his name in the anti-vaccine movement in 2005, when he published a story alleging a massive conspiracy regarding thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that had been removed from all childhood vaccines except for some variations of the flu vaccine in 2001. In his piece, Kennedy completely ignored an Institute of Medicine immunization safety review on thimerosal published the previous year; he’s also ignored the nine studies funded or conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that have taken place since 2003.

I first wrote about Kennedy and his foray into the anti-vaccine movement in “The Panic Virus,” my book about the persistence of the myth that vaccines can cause autism. Below is a lightly edited version of my chapter on Kennedy, titled “A Conspiracy of Dunces.”

While Kennedy has been brazen in publicizing outright lies, he appears to be less loquacious when faced with skeptical reporters. I attempted to contact Kennedy more than 20 times over an 18-month period. At various points, I was told that he was considering my interview request, that he was on vacation, that he was dealing with a family crisis, that he wasn’t feeling well, that he was behind in his emails, and that he was on the verge of calling me back. (He never did.)

In the summer of 2005, Rolling Stone and Salon simultaneously published “Deadly Immunity,” a 4,700-word story on mercury in vaccines written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Kennedy, the eldest son and namesake of the former attorney general and New York senator, described how he’d come to investigate the issue: “I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical.” [Note: Shortly after “The Panic Virus” was published, Salon decided to pull the piece from its site.]

Then, Kennedy wrote, he began to look at the information these parents had collected. He pored over the transcript from the 2000 CDC-organized meeting outside Atlanta and spoke with members of SafeMinds and Generation Rescue, two groups notable for their virulent opposition to vaccines. He also studied the work of the “only two scientists” who had managed to gain access to government data on the safety of vaccines: Dr. Mark Geier, a frequent paid witness in lawsuits alleging harm done by vaccines, and his son, David. (The Geiers would go on to develop a “protocol” for treating autism that involved injecting children with the drug that is used to chemically castrate sex offenders at a cost of upwards of $70,000 per year.)

It wasn’t long before Kennedy became convinced that he’d stumbled upon “a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed.” If, as he believed to be the case, “our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine,” he wrote.

Kennedy went on to quote SafeMinds’ Mark Blaxill, whom he identified as the vice president of “a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicine.” Blaxill accused the CDC of “incompetence and gross negligence” and claimed that the damage done by vaccines was “bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you’ve ever seen.”

In the article’s final paragraph, Kennedy warned his readers of the scandal’s likely effects on the future: “It’s hard to calculate the damage to our country—and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases—if Third World nations come to believe that America’s most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It’s not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by American’s enemies abroad.” In fact, he wrote, he was certain that the failure of a generation of “scientists and researchers … to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world’s poorest populations.”

In order for what Kennedy was claiming to be true, scientists and officials in governmental agencies, nonprofit organizations, and publicly held companies around the world would need to be part of a coordinated multi-decade scheme to prop up “the vaccine industry’s bottom line” by masking the dangers of thimerosal.

In Kennedy’s telling, the plotting had been going on since the Great Depression, but it had begun in renewed earnest five years earlier “at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center,” a location that Kennedy said was chosen because it was “nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy.” (In reality, the location was chosen because a series of previously scheduled conferences had booked up all of the hotel rooms within 50 miles of Atlanta.)

Kennedy relied on the 286-page transcript of the Simpsonwood meeting to corroborate his allegations—and wherever the transcript diverged from the story he wanted to tell, he simply cut and pasted until things came out right. Again and again, he used participants’ warnings about the reckless manipulation of scientific data by people with ulterior motives to do the very thing they were afraid would happen.

The CDC’s Robert Chen was one of the victims of Kennedy’s approach. His actual quote is as follows:

“Before we all leave, someone raised a very good process question that all of us as a group needs to address, and that is this information of all the copies we have received and are taking back home to your institutions, to what extent should people feel free to make copies to distribute to others in their organization? We have been privileged so far that given the sensitivity of information, we have been able to manage to keep it out of, let’s say, less responsible hands, yet the nature of kind of proliferation, and Xerox machines being what they are, the risk of that changes. So I guess as a group perhaps, and Roger [Bernier, the associate director of science at the National Immunization Program], you may have thought about that?”

In Kennedy’s hands, it became this:

“Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that ‘given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let’s say, less responsible hands.’”
Advertisement

Even more egregious was Kennedy’s slicing and dicing of a lengthy statement by the World Health Organization’s John Clements. In this instance, Kennedy transposed sentences and left out words. Here is what actually appeared in the transcript, with italics added to indicate the sentences Kennedy used in his story:

“And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, because the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted and we have all reached this point now where we are left hanging . . . There is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through Freedom of Information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say. . . . My message would be that any other study—and I like the study that has just been described here very much, I think it makes a lot of sense—but it has to be thought through. What are the potential outcomes and how will you handle it? How will it be presented to a public and a media that is hungry for selecting the information they want to use for whatever means they have in store for them?”

In “Deadly Immunity,” that was changed to read:

“Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study ‘should not have been done at all’ and warned that the results ‘will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled.’”

To top it all off, Kennedy married together two separate comments made by the developmental biologist and pediatrician Robert Brent. In the first one, Brent said:

“Finally, the thing that concerns me the most, those who know me, I have been a pin stick in the litigation community because of the nonsense of our litigious society. This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country when this information becomes available. They don’t want valid data. At least that is my biased opinion. They want business and this could potentially be a lot of business.”

Thirty-eight pages later, Brent addressed the topic of “junk scientists”:

“If an allegation was made that a child’s neurobehavioral findings were caused by thimerosal containing vaccines, you could readily find a junk scientist who would support the claim with ‘a reasonable degree of certainty.’ … So we are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits if they were initiated and I am concerned.”

In a distortion that the editor of a high school newspaper would have balked at, Kennedy took these two statements, switched their order, and ran them together:

“We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits,” said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. DuPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. “This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country.”

In the overall scheme of the piece, that type of quote massaging was considered so insignificant that it didn’t warrant inclusion in the more than five hundred words’ worth of “notes,” “clarifications,” and “corrections” that were eventually appended to the piece. (The misuse of Chen’s quote wasn’t acknowledged either.) Among the issues that were addressed were incorrect attributions, inaccuracies about which vaccines contained thimerosal at different points in time, a misrepresentation of the number of shots children had received in the 1980s, and a false claim about a scientist having a patent on the measles vaccine.

None of this put a dent in Kennedy’s conviction that his allegations were valid, and in the weeks and months to come, he kept on repeating many of the errors Rolling Stone and Salon had already publicly acknowledged were wrong.

Just four days after a correction confirmed that his story had misstated the levels of ethylmercury infants had received—it was actually “40 percent, not 187 times, greater than the EPA’s limit for daily exposure to methyl mercury”—Kennedy told MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, “We are injecting our children with 400 times the amount of mercury that FDA or EPA considers safe.” Kennedy also said on-air that children were being given 24 vaccines and that each one of them had “this thimerosal, this mercury in them.”

Those statements were not even remotely true: In 2005, the CDC recommended that children under 12 years old receive a total of eight vaccines that protected against a dozen different diseases. Only three of those vaccines had ever used thimerosal as a preservative, and all had been thimerosal-free since 2001.

That Scarborough didn’t ask Kennedy to produce evidence supporting his accusations is not surprising: Scarborough had long had a hunch that vaccines were to blame for his teenage son’s “slight form of autism called Asperger’s.” Kennedy’s research, it seemed, had confirmed his suspicions once and for all. “There’s no doubt in my mind,” Scarborough said, “and maybe it’s two years from now, maybe it’s five years from now, maybe it’s ten years from now—we are going to find out thimerosal causes, in my opinion, autism.”

Republished with permission from STAT. This article originally appeared on January 10, 2017
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:50 pm
Quote:
He Is "An Innocent Man" - Trump Happy After DoJ Drops All Charges Against General Flynn

Let's hope this does stop the declassification of documents relating to the Russia hoax. I hope Powell keeps digging.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/doj-abandons-flynn-criminal-case-after-newly-discovered-information
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:53 pm
@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:
First of all: just because Dr Judy blows her own horn does not make her a whistle blower.

We do not know what makes a whistle blower, the last one was invisible.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:58 pm
Back to the narrative and the culture it has spawned. Lots of hate.
blatham
 
  5  
Thu 7 May, 2020 02:59 pm
Quote:
Right Wing Watch
@RightWingWatch
6h
Ralph Reed says evangelicals supported Trump not because they are hypocrites who care only about political power but because they were showing Christian grace, acceptance, and love to him.
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:08 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
Christian grace, acceptance, and love to him.

Anything on what Islam says and does?
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:10 pm
@coldjoint,
Zero Hedge or ZeroHedge is a libertarian or right-wing financial blog,[4][5][6] presenting staff-written articles and aggregating news and opinions from external sources.[7] Zero Hedge, per its motto,[a] is bearish in its investment outlook and analysis, often deriving from its adherence to the Austrian School of economics and credit cycles.[8] While often labeled as a financial permabear,[9][10] Zero Hedge is also seen as a source of "cutting-edge news, rumors and gossip in the financial industry".[11]

Over time, Zero Hedge expanded into non-financial analysis,[c] advocating what CNN Business called an anti-establishment and conspiratorial worldview, and which has been associated with alt-right views,[5][13] and a pro-Russian bias.[14][15][16][1] Other sources describe Zero Hedge as libertarian.[4][5] Zero Hedge's non-financial commentary has led to a number of § Site bans by various global social media platforms, some of which have been overturned (e.g. 2019 Facebook ban),[17] while others remain (e.g. 2020 Twitter ban).[5]

Zero Hedge in-house content is posted under the pseudonym "Tyler Durden"; the founder and main editor was identified as Daniel Ivandjiiski.[12]

History and authorship
See also: Daniel Ivandjiiski (see below)

Zero Hedge's first post appeared on 9 January 2009 at 4pm,[18][3] and the domain was registered on 11 January 2009.[19] According to the Boston Business Journal, the website "publishes financial news and opinion, aggregated and original" from a number of writers "who purportedly hail from within the financial industry."[20] Almost all in-house articles are signed under the collective pseudonym, "Tyler Durden", a character in the Chuck Palahniuk book and movie Fight Club.[20][3]

In September 2009, news reports identified Daniel Ivandjiiski, a Bulgarian-born,[d] U.S.-educated,[e] former hedge-fund trader, who was barred from the securities industry in September 2008 for earning US$780 from an insider trade by FINRA,[21] as the founder of the site, and reported that "Tyler Durden" was a pseudonym for Ivandjiiski.[3][22][23] FINRA rulings show Ivandjiiski worked for 3 years at New York investment bank, Jefferies & Co.,[24] as well a number of hedge funds, the last of which was Wexford Capital LLC, a fund led by former Goldman Sachs traders.[25] One female site contributor, who spoke to New York magazine in an interview arranged by Ivandjiiski, said "up to 40" people could post under the "Tyler Durden" pseudonym.[3] The same New York magazine article, published on 27 September 2009, stated that Ivandjiiski's father was Krassimir Ivandjiiski,[3] a Bulgarian publisher and editor of the website Strogo Sekretno ("Top Secret"), and monthly publication Bulgarian Confidential, since 1994.[f][1]

In a 29 April 2016 Bloomberg article "unmasking" Zero Hedge,[12] the authors writing as "Tyler Durden" were revealed as Ivandjiiski, then age 37, Tim Backshall, age 45 (a known credit derivatives strategist, who had been on CNBC; an irony given Zero Hedge's strong aversion to CNBC),[27] and Colin Lokey, age 32 (a Seeking Alpha staff writer).[28] Lokey, the newest member, who joined in 2015, publicly revealed himself and the other two, when he left the site in April 2016.[29] Ivandjiiski confirmed the three men "had been the only Tyler Durdens on the payroll" since Lokey joined in 2015.[12] Lokey said he was paid $6,000 per month, and received a bonus of $50,000, earning over $100,000 in 2015.[12] According to Ivandjiiski, the blog generates revenue from online advertising (there is no subscription service).[12]

In March 2020, Bulgarian litigation between Krassimir Ivandjiiski and U.S. journalist Seth Hettena revealed further details about the Ivandjiiski family and the site's ownership.[1]

Site bans

On 12 March 2019, Bloomberg reported that Facebook had banned users from sharing Zero Hedge posts three days earlier.[17] MarketWatch, noting that Zero Hedge is a "frequent critic of Facebook", reported that the ban was lifted later that day with Facebook saying that the ban was a "mistake with our automation to detect spam".[30] Business Insider, describing Zero Hedge as "a favorite of City and Wall Street traders, known for its anti-establishment and bearish slant on financial topics", noted that Donald Trump Jr. and Nigel Farage raised objections to Facebook's censure of Zero Hedge.[31]

On 20 March 2019, Australian telecom company Telstra temporarily denied access to Zero Hedge, and other websites, as a result of the Christchurch mosque shootings.[32][33][34]

On 20 January 2020, Bloomberg News reported that Zero Hedge's Twitter account, which then had 670,000 followers, was "permanently suspended" from Twitter for "violating our platform manipulation policy".[4][35] Bloomberg reported that Zero Hedge had been informed by Twitter that the suspension was as a result of an article titled: "Is This The Man Behind The Global Coronavirus Pandemic?", regarding a Chinese virologist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was picked up in an article by BuzzFeed News, who made the complaint to Twitter.[13][5][6]

Manifesto and views


The most strongly held belief by Zero Hedge is in Austrian economics, and that economic cycles are really credit cycles, and that the quantitative easing ("QE") by global central banks is a temporary and artificial asset-price support scheme, that makes the credit cycle even more extreme; and hence the site's strongly bearish views.[g][8] As a result of this view, Zero Hedge supports assets that are outside of the central banking system, including precious metals and gold,[11][37] and even cryptocurrencies. The site is strongly against Keynesian economics,[38] and sees quantitative easing as a Keynesian "money printing trick",[39] and vilifies advocates of this approach, such as Paul Krugman in particular.[40][h] The site praises writers with similar views, such Albert Edwards and John Hussman.

Critics of Zero Hedge label the site a "permabear",[10] whose views missed the global recovery since 2013. Zero Hedge responds that the since 2013, global central banks have undertaken a continuous programme of quantitative easing ("QE") (e.g. aggregate monthly easing has rarely dropped below the level of QE1 or QE2, see graphic opposite),[41] and when QE1 and QE2 ended, markets collapsed. The site references Japan, whose market set new lows after each round of QE, from 1994–2013,[42] and where the latest round of QE, started in 2013, has seen the BOJ become a dominant owner of the Nikkei 225.[43][44]

Zero Hedge maintains a number of financial views/theories which are considered conspiratorial, and/or hard-to-prove or unprovable;[45][9] notable views include:

Price manipulation by high-frequency trading ("HFT"). The belief that investment banks/funds use HFT/"dark pools" to manipulate prices;[j]
Precious metals manipulation. The belief that investment banks manipulate precious metals prices to suit their derivative books;[k]
Plunge-protection-team ("PPT"). The belief that central banks intervene in markets on a frequent, almost daily basis, to support prices;[l]
U.S banks front running the U.S. FED. The belief that U.S. investment banks, most profitable of all global investment banks, have knowledge of PPT trades;[m]
Market illiquidity. The belief that market liquidity, when HFT and PPT flows are taken out, is low, implying prices are artificial;[n]
Chinese fraud. The belief that Chinese economic data is made-up, and that many Chinese companies are fraudulent (called "fraudcaps" by the site);[o]
Manipulation of house prices. The belief that central bankers, Mark Carney as most typical,[p] use houses as stimulus, by loosening mortgage terms.[q]

A connected theme from the above views is that central banks have nationalized capital markets, that prices are artificial and do not reflect economic theory, that U.S. financial institutions have profited from this, and that the manipulation of asset prices has driven wealth inequality in society and built up financial risks (due to the leverage against these prices). Zero Hedge often shows the chart of G3 balance sheets versus Amazon's share price (see graphic), concluding that U.S. taxpayer's money has been used by the U.S. FED to make U.S. taxpayers unemployed, as Amazon, despite making few profits, is one of the highest valued companies.

Bearish macroeconomic views and conspiracy theories aside, Zero Hedge is noted as a source of detailed, but proprietary, research from Wall Street investment banks and institutions, on securities, which can be picked up by the financial media.[46][47][48] Sometimes, the research is about other investment banks.[49] It has also been a source of breaking news in the general capital markets industry.[50][11][51][52] In Zero Hedge's early years, it was associated with exposing the unknown world of High-frequency trading ("HFT"), and the HFT techniques that Zero Hedge claimed amounted to market manipulation.[11][53]

Zero Hedge is known for personalized attacks on specific finance professionals, examples being newsletter writer and commodity analyst Dennis Gartman (over 758 articles),[54] Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman (over 703 articles),[55] and fund manager Whitney Tilson (over 325 articles),[56] amongst others.
Non-financial views

While Zero Hedge's financial content is often referred to/quoted in the mainstream financial media (see above), its non-financial content has not been relied on by mainstream media.

The 29 April 2016 unmasking article by Bloomberg, quoted former website staffer Colin Lokey as saying: "I can't be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It's wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run. This isn't a revolution. It's a joke." Lokey told Bloomberg that he was pressured to frame issues in a way he felt was "disingenuous," summarizing its political stances as "Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry=dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft."[12]

In May 2016, Benjamin Wallace-Wells writing in The New Yorker magazine, in a follow-up piece to Bloomberg's 29 April 2016 article, associated the website with the alt-right, although the article did not specifically label Zero Hedge as alt-right, stating: "You could ask some of the same questions about the alt-right, the loosely assembled far-right movement that exists largely online, and that overlaps with both the Trump campaign and with the politics of Zero Hedge". Wallace-Wells also noted that the site demonstrated a pro-Russian bias, stating the site had a "pointed" Russophilia.[14]

In a series of articles in June–July 2017, the Financial Times, covering an event organised by one of the site's bloggers,[r] said that, "It probably didn't help that ZeroHedge was also used as a lead-in for a 2016 New Yorker piece about the alt-right, despite its financial focus and a political bent that is more Drudge than Richard Spencer."[15]

In January 2020, when the site was removed from Twitter, Buzzfeed News described Zero Hedge as "pro-Trump" and "far-right",[13] while reporting on the removal, the Washington Post said that Zero Hedge "In recent years, the blog has amplified right-wing conspiracy theories on a range of topics".[5]

In March 2020, American journalist Seth Hettena wrote an opinion-piece in The New Republic titled "Is Zero Hedge a Russian Trojan Horse?", and provided details on the links between Krassimir Ivandjiiski (the site publisher's Bulgarian father), and Soviet-era activities in propaganda, revealed during litigation initiated by the father against Hettena in the Bulgarian courts.[1]


Launch to 2014

In August 2009, under the pseudonym Tyler Durden, Ivandjiiski was interviewed on Bloomberg Radio on HFT.[61][62] By September 2009, Zero Hedge had begun drawing more traffic than some established financial blogs,[23] and Quantcast reported that the blog was getting 333,000 unique visitors a month (by 2018, it would be 40 million per month).[22] In September 2009, journalist Joe Hagan wrote that Zero Hedge's founder was "a zealous believer in a sweeping conspiracy that casts the alumni of Goldman Sachs as a powerful cabal at the helm of U.S. policy."[3] In September and October 2009, Financial journalists Felix Salmon and Justin Fox characterized the site as conspiratorial.[63][22] However, Justin Fox, went on to describe Ivandjiiski as "a wonderfully persistent investigative reporter" and credited him for successfully turning high-frequency trading "into a big political issue," but also termed most of the writing on the website as "half-baked hooey," albeit with some "truth to be gleaned from it."[22]

In his book, Griftopia (2010), Matt Taibbi cited Zero Hedge as having accurately assessed the level of corruption in the banking industry.[64] In January 2011, Zero Hedge was quoted in the Columbia Journalism Review regarding a JPMorgan-Ambac lawsuit: "JPM committed fraud through misrepresentation, then wilfully and maliciously traded against the entities it had sold misrepresented securities to."[65] In March 2011, Time magazine ranked Zero Hedge as 9th, in its 25 Best Financial Blogs,[45] with nominator, Bloomberg's Paul Kedrosky, stating that "So while I don't read Zero Hedge regularly—it's too bearish, too conspiratorial and too much of an intellectual monoculture—I like knowing that it exists. Any time I'm feeling like things might just turn out O.K. on planet Economic Earth, I know where to turn to be disabused of that stupid idea." Susanne Craig of The New York Times described Zero Hedge in October 2011 as "a well-read and controversial financial blog."[66]

In December 2012, Bank of America, which had been criticized by the site in the past, blocked its employees' access to Zero Hedge from BOA servers.[20]

2014 to 2018

In September 2014, the site was described by CNN Money as offering a "deeply conspiratorial, anti-establishment and pessimistic view of the world."[9]

In November 2014, Dr. Craig Pirrong, Professor of Finance at the University of Houston, stated: "I have frequently written that Zero Hedge has the MO of a Soviet agitprop operation, that it reliably peddles Russian propaganda: my first post on this, almost exactly three years ago, noted the parallels between Zero Hedge and Russia Today."[67][68] In December 2013, Zero Hedge accused Dr. Pirrong of being a "paid-for-Professor", who had "made a living of collecting "expert academic" fees by simply signing off on [wall street] memoranda", quoting a New York Times expose by David Kocieniewski into Dr. Pirrong.[69]

In September 2015, Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman described Zero Hedge as a scaremongering outlet that promotes fears of hyperinflation and an "obviously ridiculous" form of "monetary permahawkery."[71] In November 2012, Krugman had noted that Bill McBride of Calculated Risk, an economics blog, has treated Zero Hedge with "appropriate contempt".[72] Krugman has been one of the most vilified individuals on Zero Hedge, and the subject of over 703 articles (almost all negative) since inception,[55] due to Krugman's advocacy of Keynesian economics.[h][40]

In April 2016, as part of its expose from the Colin Lokey interview, Unmasking the Men Behind Zero Hedge, Wall Street's Renegade Blog, Bloomberg Markets stated that since its founding in the middle of the financial crisis, "Zero Hedge has grown from a blog to an Internet powerhouse. Often distrustful of the 'establishment' and almost always bearish, it's known for a pessimistic worldview. Posts entitled 'Stocks Are In a Far More Precarious State Than Was Ever Truly Believed Possible' and 'America's Entitled (And Doomed) Upper Middle Class' are not uncommon."[12]

In a May 2016 follow-up Bloomberg opinion piece, Noah Smith said: "Zero Hedge has become known as a source of cutting-edge news, rumors and gossip about the financial industry, as well as a haven for gold bugs, foes of the Federal Reserve and critics of high-frequency trading"; and also that: "But I've realized that the website is also something else—a kind of support group for financial industry workers who are worried about their own economic future in the face of sweeping changes in technology, regulation and demand".[11]

A May 2016 piece by Benjamin Wallace-Wells for The New Yorker magazine, also following up on the April 2016 Bloomberg unmasking article, described Zero Hedge as, "a blog that combines analysis of the financial markets, emphasizing the essential corruption of Wall Street".[14] As discussed in § Non-financial views, the article also associated the site with the alt-right, and of being pointedly Russophile.[14]

Post–2018

On 20 November 2019, NBC News reported Zero Hedge as the initial source of a "misleading claim about the head of the Ukrainian energy company at the heart of the House impeachment inquiry", which went viral during the impeachment hearings. NBC said that "ZeroHedge apparently misconstrued the original Russian article from the Interfax-Ukraine News Agency, which did not mention an indictment. The Interfax-Ukraine News Agency operates as part of Interfax, a Russian news outlet".[16]

In January 2020, after Zero Hedge had been removed from Twitter, Business Insider reported that "In the years after the financial crash, the site had a bonafide social presence and a solidified place among financial insiders", and that "Since its rise to popularity among Wall Street insiders, Zero Hedge has since become known for sensationalist headlines and gruff take on the world's news".[74] Reporting on the affair, the Washington Post said that, "Zero Hedge launched in 2009, mostly featuring news and commentary about financial markets from a libertarian perspective. In recent years, the blog has amplified right-wing conspiracy theories on a range of topics".[5]



Daniel Ivandjiiski graduated from the American College of Sofia in 1997,[1][2] and then moved to the United States where he studied molecular biology at the University of Pennsylvania, to pursue a career in medicine, until 2001.[1][2] In July 2001, he joined New York investment bank, Jefferies & Co.[3] He passed his securities exams in November 2001 (Series 7 and Series 63).[3] In October 2004, he joined Los Angeles-based investment bank Imperial Capital LLC,[3] before moving back to New York in May 2005 to join investment bank Miller Buckfire LLC.[3]

While at Miller Buckfire, Ivandjiiski was charged by FINRA of gaining USD 780 from an insider trade on 14–15 March 2006.[4] On 3 September 2008, FINRA reached their decision, published on 11 September 2008, that Daniel K. Ivandjiiski was to be barred from acting as a broker or otherwise associating with a broker-dealer firm, and from being a FINRA member.[3] Ivandjiiski had not turned 30 at that time, and did not appeal the FINRA decision.[3]

In September 2007, before the FINRA ruling, Ivandjiiski moved to the Connecticut-based hedge fund Wexford Capital LLC, run by former Goldman Sachs traders.[5] After the FINRA ruling, Ivandjiiski left Wexford Capital, and within a few weeks posted his first blog on the Zero Hedge site at 4pm on 9 January 2009.[6
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:14 pm
Quote:

Is the Coronavirus Unprecedented?

The answer is no.
Quote:
Still, the conclusion is reasonably clear. What is unprecedented about the Wuhan virus is not the lethality of the disease, but rather the reaction to it by many of the world’s governments.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/05/is-the-coronavirus-unprecedented.php?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=sw&utm_campaign=sw
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:14 pm
@coldjoint,
But when they disagree with us its not hate speech. So you get your lessons from some RW comedian. I looked up his web site. Have you???
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:16 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Islam


What would awakenwithjp say???

Isam has to do what with what, bigot?
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:20 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
I looked up his web site.

I don't care about his website. I posted a video. Hate speech does not exist it is a PC concept to gut our right to free speech. Anyone who thinks there is has given upon independent thought and the reality that being offended is just the way it goes. No says you have to listen to anyone, except big tech and Democrats and globalists. I don't hear them.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  4  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:22 pm
@coldjoint,
Bull ****.

About Us

Power Line is a site that features commentary on the news from a conservative perspective. We have been serving readers since Memorial Day weekend 2002. Four of us contribute to the site and add our personal interests to the mix of commentary on the news. We are:

John H. Hinderaker practiced law for 41 years, enjoying a nationwide litigation practice. He retired from the practice of law at the end of 2015, and is now President of Center of the American Experiment, a think tank headquartered in Minnesota.

Mr. Hinderaker lives with his family in Apple Valley, Minnesota. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College and Harvard Law School. During his career as a lawyer, he was named one of the top commercial litigators and one of the 100 best lawyers in Minnesota, and was voted by his peers one of the most respected lawyers in that state. He was repeatedly listed in The Best Lawyers in America and was recognized as Minnesota’s Super Lawyer of the Year for 2005. John can be reached by phone at (612) 354-1239.



Power Line is an American conservative political blog, founded in May 2002. Its posts were originally written by three lawyers who attended Dartmouth College together, namely John H. Hinderaker, Scott W. Johnson, and Paul Mirengoff. The site is published by Publir LLC, founded by Joseph Malchow, also a Dartmouth graduate.

The site gained recognition among the American right for its role in covering the Killian documents story that aired during the 2004 Presidential campaign about forged documents relating to President George W. Bush's term of service in the Texas Air National Guard, which kept him out of the Vietnam War.

Schiavo memo

Power Line speculated that the Schiavo memo was most likely forged by Democrats as a political dirty trick. When the memo turned out to be written by a Republican aide, Brian Darling, Power Line acknowledged the revelation, but continued to criticize mainstream media for stating that the memo was "a product of the party's leadership or had an official status."[10]

Tucson shooting

Mirengoff left the blog shortly after writing a January, 2011 post on a Tucson memorial service honoring those who died as the result of shootings at a Gabby Giffords rally; in his post he criticized the inclusion of Native American rituals. The post was later removed,[16] but days later Mirengoff left the blog, and in announcing his exit thanked Hinderaker, Johnson, and the readers for the opportunity to participate in the blog.[17] When Mirengoff left the site, Hinderaker and Johnson recruited Steven F. Hayward to replace him. On Apr 20, 2012, Mirengoff rejoined the site, saying "My return to blogging coincides with my retirement from the practice of law. With all that extra time on my hands, I hope to be a better, more productive blogger this time around."[18]


A blog by three lawyers with no expertise in epidemiology. FAIL!
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:26 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Isam has to do what with what, bigot?

Mentioning Islam(Isam) does not make me a bigot. It makes you act like a child screaming and calling people names. Anything else, you are looking very petty.
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:26 pm
In real news, the DOJ dropped all charges against general Michael Flynn. It looks like the Russia collusion scam is finally starting to collapse, how long until somebody is brought up on charges and ends up in jail? Adam schiff is starting to panic and is now suddenly releasing all sorts of information... The sad part is, is that he is from Los Angeles and those idiots will just continue to re elect his lying treasonous ass.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:37 pm
Quote:
Jerry Nadler Rages After DOJ Drops Flynn Case: ‘Outrageous!’

Laughing Laughing Laughing
Quote:
The Department said it had concluded that Flynn’s interview by the FBI was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis.”

The U.S. attorney reviewing the Flynn case, Jeff Jensen, recommended dropping the case to Attorney General William Barr last week and formalized the recommendation in a document this week.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/07/jerry-nadler-rages-outrageous-that-doj-dropped-f
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:43 pm
@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:
About Us


You keep attacking the source and ignoring the facts. Relevance is simply out of your reach.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:51 pm
@coldjoint,
No, but bring it up with no context does.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Thu 7 May, 2020 03:57 pm
@coldjoint,
When the sources are bad, the information is going to be bad, particularly since even they don't claim to be experts in the fiels of their claim nor do they even bother quoting experts. And no, Dr Judy may be an expert in fudging reports, stealing computers, software and data and making laughable representations in her expertice, what its like to be arrested, tried and jailed, she's no expert in what you want her to stand for.

You brain is hurt - who you going to talk to: a brain surgeon or a lawyer blogging away under a pseudonym?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.55 seconds on 01/17/2025 at 11:08:03