Now that the number of people killed in the whole nursing home tragedy in New York is beginning to come out, it's time to protect the Democrat Party.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top aide is admitting to a coverup in New York state’s Covid-19 nursing home death toll, according to multiple reports.

CNN and The New York Post report Melissa DeRosa, Secretary to the New York governor, privately apologized to Democratic lawmakers during a virtual call on Wednesday. DeRosa said “we froze” data on Covid-19 deaths among long-term care facility residents out of fear the true numbers would “be used against us” by President Donald Trump and federal prosecutors, according to sources who participated in the call.

Cuomo is a large liability, and his mandates were echoed by some other states' governors. This is shedding a bad light on the Democrat Party's handling of the COVID-19 issues in their states. What's the party's answer? Get Cuomo as far away as you can Democrat Party as possible before he's brought up on charges for his handling of the nursing home deaths, and the coverup of the data.

Democrats never do anything without the blessing of the party --the fraudulent death statistics tie directly back to the Democrat Party. But they want it to appear as if Cuomo was acting alone. I don't buy that for a minute. That's why they had a leaked virtual call in which Melissa DeRosa was "apologizing" to Democratic lawmakers. This was leaked on purpose to further distance Cuomo from the Democrat Party.

Now Cuomo is going to have an entire Congo Line of accusers going after him for sexual harassment. Harassment charges never really hurt Democrat candidates, because the media refuses to cover them. If they are covering the accusers of Cuomo, it has nothing to do with harassment. It's a method of taking him out of the lime light for the nursing home deaths, while simultaneously distancing him from the Democrat Party as a whole.

The stories and accusers just keep coming out of the woodwork.

A former aide says Gov. Andrew Cuomo was “trying to sleep with me” during a one-on-one meeting in his Albany office last year — with the 25-year-old adding that “he implied to me that I was old enough for him and he was lonely.”

Charlotte Bennett made the stunning comments in an interview that aired Thursday night on the “CBS Evening News with Norah O’Donnell,” saying that her then-boss, Cuomo, now 63, asked probing questions about her sex life when they were alone together on June 5.

Far left leaning CBS News is all of a sudden interested in something that Cuomo is accused of? Since when?

But the hits just keep on coming.

Two more women came forward Saturday to accuse Gov. Cuomo of sexually harassing behavior, including a former press aide who describes struggling to free herself from his repeated hugs, and a young assistant who now says he left her feeling like “just a skirt.”

Former press aide Karen Hinton endured a “very long, too long, too tight, too intimate” embrace from Cuomo in a dimly lit Los Angeles hotel room in December 2000, she told the Washington Post.

Again another leftist media organization is now worried about what Cuomo is being accused of?

This is all about misdirection, that's all this is. Look over here, there's a sex scandal!

The Democrat's plan to avoid scrutiny by the Trump Campaign, while making insanely stupid decisions, is being exposed. Sending the sick people back to the nursing homes to die is unforgivable. This should not be forgotten.

"Follow the science," they say. You don't need a study to know that sending sick people back to infect other people is a bad idea. That's the whole purpose of a quarantine in the first place!

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

I know that there's been some creepy stuff in the past, but this is getting pretty creepy!

The following is from an article on the Global Times.

Tired and depressed after a long day's work, a man sits down and asks his smart stereo to play a song. The stereo immediately recognizes his emotional state and plays him a cheerful tune. In the beautiful melody, the man is slowly rejuvenated, and his mood gradually improves.

Conversely, at a busy highway checkpoint, artificial intelligence (AI) pre-warning systems silently observe drivers and passengers in vehicles passing through. Seconds later, security officers stop a car with passengers looking strangely nervous and discover drugs in the car.

These scenes reminiscent of science fiction are on the increase in quotidian life. In China, emotion recognition technology is fast developing in this data and AI era boom, and has been widely used in various fields including health, anti-terrorism, and urban security, industry insiders told the Global Times.

"Currently, the AI emotion recognition tech is still led by the US, but its practical uses are already blossoming in China," said Wei Qingchen, head of EmoKit Tech Co., Ltd. that specializes in developing products based on its emotion recognition engine Emokit.

Most people have at least heard about the movie "Minority Report." As part of the "PreCrime" unit, the authorities arrest people for "Future Crimes" or crimes they have not yet committed. Of course this is science fiction, but check out this next part.

At least Tesla has the answer. Let the car do the driving for you, then you don't have to worry about appearing nervous. Also you could wear sunglasses at night. The AI won't know what to do.

Ma noted the important role this tech can play in maintaining social stability and protecting people's lives.

He referred to a shooting case that happened in the American city of Lakewood in 2009. In this case, ex-prisoner Maurice Clemmons fatally shot four police officers at a local coffee shop only one week after he was released from jail.

"It might not have happened if the jail had done a risk assessment on Clemmons, and postponed to release him after finding that he might have posed a threat to others' safety," Ma sighed.

So, they could have used the AI to determine that the guy was up to something. How would they know what he was up to? Or would they just use the AI to keep him in jail indefinitely? This is a very slippery slope.

Also disturbing is the fact that the best emotion reading AI is developed here in the US, which means they'll be deploying it shortly, if they haven't already used it to track down the people from January 6th who entered The Capitol. Hmm... I'm sure none of them were nervous!

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

I'm not very familiar with the World Economic Forum (WEF for all the cool kids) but I do find their take on the world economy a little strange. I would imagine that they support thriving economies around the globe, right?

If you look here, you'll see one of their videos that was put out earlier this week, it has since been removed.

NEW - Klaus Schwab's World Economic Forum (WEF) tweeted yesterday that "Lockdowns are quietly improving cities around the world," accompanied by a video showing deserted streets, empty factories, and grounded planes. After backlash, they deleted it. Copy:pic.twitter.com/KWOF1OHkPH

— Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) February 27, 2021

Why would the WEF be touting numbers based on a loss in world/global economic activity? Wouldn't the WEF be in support of ending the lockdowns, because it's good for the world/global economy?

The video is pointing out all of the good things that have come about as a result of global economic downturn. Who exactly is benefitting from this? Why do we need more of this? Why would the WEF be a proponent of this?

This is more than a little odd to me.

What do you think?

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

I couldn't help but just put a screenshot up. I can't believe that CBS is being this open about the news! But hey, it's not the Biden administration's "miss step," so it's OK to report it.

‘Nuff said.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Robinhood just shot itself in the foot, but did it really? Apparently Robinhood makes it's money from hedge funds. Robinhood is taking the clients' purchasing data, and selling it hedge funds.

This is a double slap in the face for Robinhood users. Not only did Robinhood disrupt purchases in GameStop and a few other stocks, at the request of the hedge fund masters, but they are using their customers' trading data to better rig the market!

This is opening a whole new can of worms. I love this, of course, because it's proving what the stock market is. A big fraud, manipulated on the back end by people you never see, to guarantee that they are going to win.

This has caused quite a bit of action on the part of hedge fund managers.

(Bloomberg) -- Hedge fund titans Ken Griffin and Steve Cohen boosted Gabe Plotkin’s Melvin Capital, injecting a total of $2.75 billion into the firm after it lost about 30% this year.

Citadel funds and firm partners will invest $2 billion, while Point72 Asset Management’s investment will be $750 million, the firms said Monday. In return, the investors will get a non-controlling revenue share in the six-year-old hedge fund. Melvin Capital may receive an additional $1 billion infusion from other investors on Feb. 1, according to a person familiar with the plans.

The capital infusion comes after Melvin Capital, which started the year with about $12.5 billion in assets, has seen its short bets, including GameStop Corp., go awry, spurring the losses, people familiar with the firm said.

This year’s stumble is rare for Plotkin. His firm has returned an average 30% a year since it was started in December 2014 after nearly a decade working for Cohen.

The house of cards is falling. How might you ask could one company own so much of the market?

Citadel Securities estimates that it commands 27% of equity volume market share in the U.S., according to the presentation, up from 21% in 2017. It’s particularly dominant in retail order flow, with 46% of the market.

The firm’s balance sheet has swelled along with its profits. At the end of the third quarter it had assets of $84.2 billion, a 61% increase from the end of 2019, while its equity capital was up 37% in the same period.

Citadel Securities owns more than a quarter of the equity market in the United States? That doesn't sound at all like the formation of a monopoly does it? Is it a stretch to believe that Robinhood wouldn't ask, "How high?" if Citadel said, "Jump." To me this was obvious.

To get down to how it all went down; there are a few things to consider. First you'll have to know how short selling works. I wasn't entirely sure myself because the inner workings of it sound illegal; at the very least they are immoral.

Thanks to Kane over at "CitizenFreePress.com" for posting a link to this article over at "market-ticker.org". Karl Denninger has a brilliant explanation of how this all went down.

If you want to short a stock you are supposed to first borrow it. That is, ordinary people cannot sell what they don't have, so if you wish to short you must first borrow that which you want to sell. This is one of the ways brokers make money; they keep all the stock their customers have in "street name" and keep track of who has what. They can (and if supply is limited do) charge you to borrow that stock. There's nothing wrong with this, provided the stock borrowed is real. It's one of the things you agree to allow if you have a margin account; as part of the "price" of that privilege the broker can loan your stock to others for the purpose of shorting it. However, since you own it if you demand it back because you wish to sell it the broker either has to find some other set of shares to replace what he lent out of yours or the short-seller is forcibly bought-in at the market because they have to return your shares. If that causes to take a loss, tough crap.

Yes, I've been forcibly bought-in before. It's a risk of the game.

There is an exception to this rule: If you are a market maker then you can short naked, that is, without borrowing first. Why? Because a market maker's job is, as the name implies, to make the market -- that is, to take the other side of whatever the customer wants to do. If I want to be long something in order to do it someone else has to sell it. Now in the physical security market this is easy; there either is or is not what I want to buy out there on the sheet offered by someone else. But in the options market there is no physical security; the entirety of it is synthetic. This means if someone wishes to buy a CALL someone else has to sell one. The MM's job is to, when necessary, be that other person.

Well, that's dangerous because naked short options positions are obligations to deliver. Specifically if you are short an IBM CALL @ $100 (for example) then you are obligated to deliver 100 shares of IBM stock on demand at any time before expiration for $100 each. It does not matter what IBM's stock is worth; if the holder of the CALL exercises their option you must deliver them. If the shares cost $500 at that time you're ****ed.

Likewise I can buy a $20 PUT on some stock. This gives me the right to PUT that stock on the other person for $20/share up until expiration. IF the price is under $20 I of course have every reason to do that -- I can buy the shares for $10 and make you pay me $20! Who doesn't like that deal? Likewise, the market maker never wants that directional bet either since on the short side of an options trade you're obligated to perform if demanded by the long side.

Nobody would stay in business being a market maker if this sort of thing could happen to them, so as soon as they take the opposing side they execute a balancing trade on the other side. In short if you're a market maker you always want to be neutral on every security you make a market in; you make a (very) small profit on each transaction but you never, ever want to be exposed directionally because the amount you get paid is tiny compared to the risk, and one mistake will bankrupt you.

Therefore if you're a market maker you can short without locating first for this explicit reason. This doesn't lead to a problem generally because nobody in their right mind as a market maker wants a directional exposure, ever. As a result the failure to locate is transient and does not accumulate; you will lay that risk off and remove the imbalance if you have to since you can construct synthetic positions that perform financially the same as real ones.

So how do you get 130% of the available shares short? It would seem impossible and is unless someone cheats.

There are some players in the market who have "market maker" status but also trade their own books or have cross-interests with those who do. Allegedly there are "Chinese walls" between those pieces (or interconnected entities.) Quite obviously that is a load of crap because otherwise what you've seen would be impossible but it clearly not only has happened before but is still happening to this day. These entities are how you wind up with short sales where the locate and borrow hasn't happened first and the position remains open across time. This is supposed to be illegal but other than a few hand-slaps in the futures markets for physical commodities I'm not aware of any criminal prosecution for doing it.

And let's be clear here: This practice is counterfeiting.

So we have quite a bit of illegal activity going on here. But will ANY of the culprits be held accountable? I think not. There's not enough people that really understand what happened to create the sort of public outcry needed -- to make anything happen.

However, quite a bit more people are now hip to the jibe when it comes to these sorts of things happening in the market. As more of this comes out, it's liable to have a negative effect on the market. I think it's going to lead people to some pull their money out of the market and move it into real estate, or some other physical asset.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.