1) The Larger Impact of the GameStop Investor Wars
"The fundamental issue currently being fought over is who gets to have a role in determining financial value, access and outcome." theepochtimes.com/the-larger-imp…
2) In some respects, the market has traditionally been seen as the ultimate arena of opportunity and free speech.
We can all invest in companies we deem attractive, and if we’re wrong, the market quickly shows us the error of our ways.
3) But recent events have exposed the extent to which this belief may be unfounded and the manner in which the financial system has been systematically weighted towards certain players, at the expense of others.
4) This time, it’s suddenly different because it’s the retail investors—the little guys—who are doing the pushing.
This time, it’s the hedge funds that got caught offside in this mess.
And now that they’re feeling financial pain, they want to change the rules.
5) But what happens if you allow a small group of individuals or institutions—government figures and regulators, certain hedge funds, and Wall Street investment houses — the power to determine the appropriateness of decisions made in the broader financial markets?
6) This “We know better than you” mentality quickly leads down a path toward greater government influence and determination on which companies are successful and, perhaps more importantly, which industries are successful.
7) Does the government get to decide where and how capital should be allocated?
What if the government doesn’t think a particular company—or a particular industry—deserves funding at all?
8) The fundamental issue currently being fought over is who gets to have a role in determining financial value, access and outcome.
Is it all the participants that make up the market?
Or is it only the entrenched Wall Street players and the government regulators?
9) Instead of placing blame on small investors, we should be looking at the risk management policies of the big hedge funds.
It was their poor risk controls that allowed them to get into this situation.
/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) "Funded by hundreds of millions of dollars from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and other high-tech interests, activist organizations created a two-tiered election system" assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2042…
2) "Private monies dictated city and county election management contrary to both federal law and state election plans endorsed and developed by state legislatures with authority granted by the United States Constitution."
3) "Executive officials in swing states facilitated, through unique and novel contracts, the sharing of private and sensitive information about citizens within those states with private interests"
1) Congress is incentivized to see Pence's role as passive.
But Constitutional scholars differ and/or acknowledge that varying interpretations exist.
Note: I am NOT predicting what Pence will do. I will just be highlighting some ambiguities.
(Apologies - will be long thread)
2) Edward Foley is head of Election Law Dept at Ohio U.
He is Left & originator of Blue Shift theory
What follows are quotes from his "war-game" paper published in the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal - Preparing for a Disputed Presidential Election lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewconten…
3) "As part of an effort to prepare for the risk of a disputed presidential election in 2020, it is imperative to consider how the embarrassingly deficient procedures might operate if they were actually called into play."
“I think several senators from Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arizona also wrote letters sent to the Vice President, [telling him] we want the vice president to at least delay it 10 to 12 days.”
Jan 20th is date that matters Constitutionally:
"Terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January"
Pence can, and in my view, should defer.
Allows Audit to proceed. Takes ECA away.
Gives states time to revisit, clarify. With new evidence.
3) …In the morning, new numbers show Trump’s lead starting to slip, and by noon, it is below 20,000. Impatient, Trump holds an impromptu press conference and announces:"
4) "So begins the saga over the disputed result of the 2020 presidential election.”
Although familiar, the passage isn’t taken from a recent article describing the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. Rather, it comes from a 55-page paper, published on Aug 31, 2019 by Ed Foley.
5) Foley’s paper, more of a Democrat war-game analysis, takes readers on a complicated electoral journey that may well prove to accurately foreshadow events through Jan. 20.
Foley has provided a complicated—but thus far surprisingly accurate—electoral roadmap to be used by Dems.