Fraud

Whistleblowing against fraud up 16x

WBnumber.png

In May 2011 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) introduced a new whistleblower program under Section 92 of the Dodd-Frank Act. This was partly in response to its much publicised failure to investigate the US$50bn Bernard L. Madoff Ponzi scheme despite being made aware of it multiple times by a whistle-blower, Mr Harry Markopolos, since 2000.

Markopolos wrote in his November 7, 2005 submission to the SEC,

“Scenario # 2 (Highly likely) Madoff Securities is the world’s largest Ponzi Scheme. In this case, there is no SEC reward payment due the whistle-blower so basically, I’m turning this case in because it’s the right thing to do. Far better that the SEC is proactive in shutting down a Ponzi Scheme of this size rather than reactive.”

The SEC now encourages whistle-blowing by offering sizable monetary awards (10 to 30% of the monetary sanctions collected). Successful enforcement actions as a result of whistleblowing have led to awards as high as US$50,000,000. As a result, the SEC has seen a 16 fold increase in claims over the last few years. The following charts are from the SEC.

Whistleblower amount.png

The SEC 2018 Whistleblowing Annual Report noted, “from program inception to end of Fiscal Year 2018, the SEC awarded over $326 million to 59 individuals.

Awards.png

On March 19, 2018, the Commission announced two of its largest-ever whistleblower awards, with two individuals sharing a nearly $50 million joint award and another whistleblower receiving more than $33 million.

As CM has been saying since whistleblower protections were enacted, those willing to speak out have surged. One can’t come out with false claims. Unsubstantiated claims are not paid.

As mentioned in the previous post, CM believes that climate scientists need an SEC-style watchdog to prosecute fraudulent claims which cost taxpayers billions in the misappropriated allocation of funds. If they do not commit fraud, they face no risks. To date, no scientists have been jailed or fined for data manipulation. By bearing no financial risk or threat of jail time, climate scientists are free to do as they please.

If Extinction Rebellion or any other alarmist group want us to declare “climate emergencies” they should have no problem submitting to a regulatory framework that ensures confidence in the data to drive the debate and allocate resources. CM guesses that they would howl in protest because after all emotion is more important that data. Torn asunder their antics would be undone by reality.

Paying someone to quit smoking on your behalf

img_2516
Jo Nova has put together an excellent piece on the Labor government’s plan to buy carbon credits overseas to atone for our CO2 sins. Buying air we can’t breathe is essentially like paying someone else to quit smoking on our behalf. How do we benefit?!?

Labor leader Bill Shorten may argue that the cost of doing nothing on climate change is a “charlatan’s argument” but CM costed it yesterday. Our CO2 emissions are equivalent to 0.000016% of the global total. No matter what we do our impact is nothing. What does tokenism get us? Zero. Zip. Nada.

Jo Nova wrote,

The 35 billion dollars we will spend on these useless, fraud-prone certificates is $35 billion we are taking out of the Australian labor market, or not spending on medicine, books or holidays in Bali. Angus Taylor, Minister for Energy, has noticed that this means $10b less tax will be paid too, which means less money for hospitals and schools.

There’s nothing wrong with payments to foreigners for real goods and services. But carbon credits buy us 0.0001C of theoretical cooling we don’t need and won’t be able to measure 100 years from now. It’s the dumbest deal Australia has ever made. Fraudsters and bankers will love it.”

Carbon credit markets have had a sketchy past. Hackers broke into poorly protected government and corporate carbon registries and swindled €3.7mn. So the credits we might buy to virtue signal may end up being fraudulent.

Carbon trading is a complete scam. As Jo Nova added,

“Independent modelling suggests the 45% emissions target of the Labor party will cost at least $264bn and as high as $542bn by 2030. The Liberal Party will “only” waste  $50 – $80b.”

All for absolutely nothing. When the economy tanks our politicians can brag about achieving lower emissions targets quicker because our climate policies will have accelerated the death of industry.

Why does climate science fraud go unpunished?

Why is it that whenever climate scientists get caught manipulating figures there are no repercussions? Let’s not kid ourselves. Governments around the world have splurged 100s of billions of TAXPAYER dollars on climate abatement that have been based on research that in numerous cases has been found to involve manipulation. Whichever way we cut it, fraud is fraud.

Take the financial sector as an example. There has been much malfeasance committed in the last few decades that have resulted in humungous penalties.

WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers was sentenced to 25 years based on nine counts of conspiracy, securities fraud and false regulatory filings to the tune of $11bn.

Enron’s former CEO Jeffrey Skilling was convicted on 35 counts of fraud, insider trading and other crimes related to Enron and sentenced to 24 years prison and fined $45 million.

Madoff got 150 years for his $65bn Ponzi scheme, Allen Stanford received 110 years jail for his $7bn fraud.

Yet when the scientific community commits fraudulent offences, they’re not even brought to trial.

Take the UNIPCC which was established by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Panel (UNEP) in 1988.

The Climategate email scandal in 2009 and the Climategate 2.0 in 2011 have shown far less faith internally than what is publicly admitted. They point to multiple cases of bullying dissenters, ignoring information that didn’t fit the narrative and data fudging.

NOAA was subpoenaed after Dr. John Bates, a recently retired principal scientist at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, exposes the Karl study which was used “to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”

Dr. Bates whistle blew on the Obama administration’s efforts to push a costly climate agenda at the expense of scientific integrity.

This was fraud. Data was manipulated ahead of the Paris summit. Developed countries committed to a minimum $100bn. The International Justice Initiative at the University of Tasmania, showed that “The total cost for developing countries to implement their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) is more than US$4.4 trillion.”

Bernie Madoff looks a rank amateur compared to the implications caused by a fabricated NOAA publication. NOAA refused to comply with initially polite inquiries to answer whistle blower claims, baselessly arguing that Congress, its employer, was not authorized to request communications from its scientists.  Despite a congressional subpoena, NOAA kept ignoring its master. Some 6 months later they begrudgingly attended a committee hearing and were found out. Punishment? Nothing. Zero. Nada.

Perhaps if these same scientists were held to the types of punishment meted out to fraudsters in the financial world, their scientific publications would “cool” (no pun intended) to reveal the truth. Alas until they face significant penalties, the alarmism won’t abate (pun intended).

The irony in “They’re all yours, Sanctuary Cities”

Will Trump’s tactics to expose the hypocrisy of sanctuary cities work? Democrats remain stubborn over funding border security. In his view, if sanctuary cities are all publicly open arms about accepting illegals then they should be happy to welcome busloads of them. The great irony of these virtue-signalling Democrat controlled cities is that they’re upset that this reality may dawn, although publicly stating they’ll be welcome. The greater irony is that a growing number of illegal immigrants are choosing to move OUT of sanctuary cities. In 2007, 7.7mn (63.1%) lived in the 20 largest metros to 6.5mn (60.7%) in 2016 according to Pew. During that time 1.5m illegal immigrants were deported (12.2mn ->10.7mn).

Despite one’s views of illegal immigration and the use of people as political pawns, ICE has just released its 2018 statistics. The numbers are staggering.

ICE’s 2018 annual report notes the following situation at the border:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) has continued to use resources as effectively and efficiently as possible to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

In FY2018, ERO arrested 158,581 aliens, 90% of whom had criminal convictions (66%), pending criminal charges (21%), or previously issued final orders (3%). The overall arrest figure represents an 11% increase over FY2017.

  • 2015: 101,800
  • 2016: 110,104
  • 2017: 143,470
  • 2018: 158,581

The number of individuals detained by ERO is driven by enforcement actions taken by ICE and apprehensions made by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In FY2018, 396,448 people were initially booked into an ICE detention facility, an increase of 22.5% over FY2017.  Book-ins to detention resulting from CBP arrests increased by 32% over the previous year, illustrating a surge in illegal border crossings.

  • 2015: 307,342
  • 2016: 352,882
  • 2017: 323,591
  • 2018: 396,448

In FY2018, ERO removed 256,086 illegal aliens, reflecting an increase of 13% over FY2017. The majority of removals (57%) were convicted criminals. Additionally, 5,914 of the removed illegal aliens were classified as either known or suspected gang members or terrorists, which is a 9% increase over FY2017.

  • 2015: 235,413
  • 2016: 240,255
  • 2017: 226,119
  • 2018: 256,086

Here are some of the reasons for arrest – both criminal convictions and charges – for 2017 (2018):

  • Driving under the influence : 80,547 (80,730)
  • Dangerous drugs: 76,503 (76,585)
  • Immigration violation:  62,517 (63,166)
  • Assault: 48,454 (50,753)
  • Larceny: 20,356 (20,340)
  • Burglary: 12,836 (12,663)
  • Fraud: 12,398 (12,862)
  • Illegal weapon possession: 11,173 (11,766)
  • Sex offences: 6,664 (6,888)
  • Stolen Vehicles: 6,174 (6,261)
  • Forgery: 5,210 (5,158)
  • Homicide: 1,886 (2,028)
  • Kidnapping: 2,027 (2,085)
  • Prostitution racketeering: 1,572 (1,739)

Since the initial surge at the Southwest border (SWB) in FY2014, there has been a significant increase in the arrival of both family units (FMUAs) and unaccompanied alien children (UACs). In FY2018, approximately 50,000 UACs and 107,000 aliens processed as FMUAs were apprehended at the SWB by the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP). These numbers represent a marked increase from FY2017 when approximately 41,000 UACs and 75,000 FMUA were apprehended by USBP.

While USBP routinely turns FMUA apprehensions over to ICE for removal proceedings, ICE is severely limited by various laws and judicial actions from detaining family units through the completion of removal proceedings. For UAC apprehensions, DHS is responsible for the transfer of custody to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) within 72 hours, absent exceptional circumstances. HHS is similarly limited in their ability to detain UACs through the pendency of their removal proceedings. When these UACs are released by HHS or FMUA are released from DHS custody, they are placed onto the non-detained docket, which currently has more than 2,641,589 cases and results in decisions not being rendered for many years. Further, even when removal orders are issued, very few aliens from the non-detained docket comply with these orders and instead join an ever-growing list of 565,892 fugitive aliens.”

Switching to compassionate grounds, who wants to see screaming kids? No-one. Locked in cages? Even less. Separated? Well, there is a good reason for that. When even the likes of left-leaning HuffPo admitted in December 2014 that 80% of women and girls are sexually assaulted while trying to make it across the border there is a good reason to question the proof of identity of the supposed parents. Even if 90% of parent/children pairs are legit, what of the 10% that aren’t? Do ICE risk it? Australia had an experience of a mother from Nepal (a democracy not at war) who deliberately poured boiling water on her infant to expedite processing on the mainland. Are these the values of people we should provide refuge to? We should not forget that many people make the journey knowing ALL the risks that confront them yet still attempt it despite the warnings.

To emphasize the danger of lax screening,  multiple kids were found dead after being abandoned once across the border as their usefulness as a golden ticket on compassionate grounds was expended. If that isn’t some of the worst forms of child abuse then what is? Moreover, these people are hardly the type that decent Americans would want to embrace with open arms!

In Jan 2016 WaPo noted, “The Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, failed to do proper background checks of adults who claimed the children…several Guatemalan teens were found in a dilapidated trailer park near Marion, Ohio, where they were being held captive in squalid conditions by traffickers and forced to work“. So slave labour to repay human traffickers? Let’s encourage more to attempt the crossing?

Then ICE has the trouble of finding the parents/guardians (sponsors) already living (often) illegally to collect their unaccompanied children at pre-arranged court hearings. The media went into a frenzy saying that ICE had lost the records. The truth came out in Feb 2016 that,

“The head of ICE’s removal operations, Thomas Homan, told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that 7,643 immigrants who arrived as children were sent home between the 2012 and 2015 budget years…More than 171,000 children, mostly from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, were arrested at the border during that same time…The number of children caught crossing the border illegally spiked in 2014 [see impacts in NY Times graphic] and the Obama administration promised that those who were not eligible for protection in the United States would be swiftly sent home… And with an immigration court backlog of more than 474,000 pending cases, some cases can take years to move through the court system…

…about 40% of immigrants are no shows at court…Finding immigrant children with outstanding deportation orders is also complicated by the fact that they often are no longer at the addresses provided to the government.”We are out looking,” Homan said. “But they are hard to find. A lot of these folks who don’t show up in court, we don’t know where they’re at.”

The pictures of kids in concentration camp style cages were from 2014. Yet don’t let that get put in the way of a narrative to show the nationalist tendencies of the current administration.

While we can express outrage at the treatment of illegal immigrants at the border, the tougher laws have started to resonate with Ana Garcia Carias, wife of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who said, Stay in the country and let’s look for solutions to support you. She visited the border and said that she didn’t recommend her citizens go to the US undocumented.

In summary, Americans want their borders safe. Rasmussen Reports notes that most citizens do not want to abolish ICE. The polling firm noted,

only 25% of Likely U.S. Voters favour getting rid of ICE whose duties include border control. Fifty-five percent (55%) are opposed…Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republicans and 53% of voters not affiliated with either major political party oppose getting rid of ICE. Democrats agree by a narrower 44% to 36% margin.”

AS CM always says, if people don’t like the laws, then move to change them. Trump’s tactics are unorthodox but will expose the hypocrisy of those that push forward the idea of protecting illegal immigrants.

Revoke Article 50 petition – fraudulent figures of 5.3mn

A4199134-28CF-4D1D-A1C3-F15DFF930F4C.jpeg

For the record. CM is a “No Deal” Brexit man. CM respects democracy. The EU has no moral authority and treats the Brits like a country forced to sign an unconditional surrender. Yet how accurate is this number of 5.3mn signatures on a petition wishing to revoke Article 50 so the UK can remain inside the EU?

If you log into the site to sign the petition there is nothing to stop one doing it an infinite number of times. One merely has to click “UK Citizen”, provide a name (bogus or not), use the same or different email addresses each time with a postcode and country of residence. Done. Endless opportunities to cheat.

See CM’s email inbox below. It shows the vote isn’t counted until you click the link but as a beta test, the same email address worked twice to lodge a signature. Is that not the most basic of flaws in an electronic system to guard against our government officials acting on false information? Clearly not.

51167B07-54BE-4783-9C46-3D5FEC3145B6.jpeg

CM hoped the petition would reject the same email address for the sake of robustness but no, no, no.  It’s game on for anyone who wants to have a say in British democracy. Just click UK citizen, even if you aren’t and go for it.  Pick a postcode in the UK and pretend. Shouldn’t a passport or proper ID be required to sign a petition to force government to act? So much for Remainers looking to defend democratic process. Typical.

Unfortunately the media will be looking at 5.3mn people demanding revocation of Article 50 as unchallenged fact. CM has proved that it is an utterly false number. The administrators of UK petitions should be utterly ashamed of themselves to allow such a rudimentary safeguard go unchecked.

CM has British citizenship. CM has every legal right to vote. Yet this petition is a flagrant distortion of the truth. Sit back and observe how many times this figure gets bandied about as a true reflection of the mood of overzealous bots and cheaters by a salivating biased media.

Utterly disgraceful.

Tesla – Augmented Earnings Vehicle?

9945EA82-B127-4462-8B8C-89F045F7F10B.jpeg

Tesla is no longer a joke. It is a farce. CM has not been a fan for the following 30 reasons. The 31st has arrived although it ties in with point 4. Tesla is technically asking for suppliers to refund a portion of the monies they were paid since 2016 to the EV maker so it can post a profit which is borderline accounting manipulation in an attempt to give the impression of an ongoing concern. If suppliers willingly extend this “interest free loan/refund” back to Tesla then it is legit of course but it smells rancid and any investors worth their salt should be able to see through this disgraceful stunt. Is the idea that Tesla shares roof on the announcement of a profit? Then the company could raise capital on the basis of fictitious “earnings” which lowers the effective cost of capital if people are dumb enough to fund it? Will these auto makers get to claim a rebate when (if) it finds profitablity?

Elon Musk is the consummate salesman. He can’t be faulted for his brilliance in being able to sell the vision of a car business that is deeply indebted, unprofitable and still worth more than Ford, GM and Fiat Chrysler combined.

Yet we questioned his state of mind – joking about bankruptcy, lambasting the families over deaths caused by the failure of his autopilot which he sold as virtually foolproof. Then his brazen publicity stunt to rescue kids in Thailand with a device the rescue squad believed was useless caused him to call one of the brave team a “pedo”.

These are recurring signs of stress with the charismatic CEO. That the game of pretending to be a real bonafide car company is fast unraveling. Sure, he has done amazing things to open the eyes of incumbent car makers of a luxury EV market.  They are coming through in short order with countless  competitor variants with distribution chains to die for. Moreover with quality that Tesla can only dream of. Not building car shells half finished and counting them as completed like Micheal Keaton’s “Working Class Man”.

The WSJ claims, “The auto maker’s memo, sent by a global supply manager, described the request as essential to Tesla’s continued operation and characterized it as an investment in the car company to continue the long-term growth between both players….Tesla declined to comment on the specific memo. But it confirmed it is seeking price reductions from suppliers for projects, some of which date back to 2016, and some of which haven’t been completed. The company called such requests a standard part of procurement negotiations to improve its competitive advantage, especially as it ramps up Model 3 production.

It is not the suppliers’ responsibility to pony up to help Tesla. They signed up on the basis of Musk’s vision at the time on being able to fulfill  his quest. His constant pushbacks, failures and delays have cost them a fortune already. Incumbent auto suppliers have long learnt lessons of teaming up with car makers that fail to deliver. That is why next to no recognized parts suppliers have signed up to the dreams of Musk.

He is without a doubt a visionary. A maverick and full credit for him to date in keeping the ideals of what will undoubtedly be a future trend. Unfortunately there are no short cuts in the auto industry. He is now painfully facing that reality. Experience is a hard teacher. You get the test first and the lesson afterwards.

Crime in London – The Bill’s Feb 2018 snapshot isn’t pretty

3B18DFFD-6270-4B46-AAF5-6FD78180A2B6.jpeg

The Met Police in London has listed the following year on year trends in crime as at Feb 2018 as follows:

Murder: +42.4%

Robbery of personal property: +41.0%

Burglary – residential: +33.5%

Theft from Person: +32.1%

Burglary – commercial: +32.0%

Violence w/ Offensive Weapon: +32.1%

Rape: +20.3%

Motor Vehicle Interference/Tampering: +19.9%

Motor Vehicle Theft: +17.3%

Theft or Push Bike: +15.6%

Theft from Motor Vehicle: +15.4%

Fraud & Forgery: +13.7%

Common Assault: +9.4%

Sexual Assault: +8.5%

Violence causing grievous bodily harm: +7.7%

Drug Possession: -5.9%

A pretty sorry tale of crime rates in London. The trends since 2014 have been a reasonably steady upward climb. Last year, 891,507 crimes were logged by the police.

The Met has also listed a hate crime section on its website. The YoY stats vs Feb 2018 are as follows:

Anti-Semitic: -1.89% (+40.5% month on month)

Domestic Abuse: +5.8%

Faith Hate Crime: +20.1%

Gun Crime (Lethal Barrel Discharge): +14.2%

Homicide: +35.5%

Homophobic Hate Crime: +3.5%

Islamophobia: +34.4% (-39.0% month on month)

Knife Crime: +26.0%

Knife Crime (w/ injury): +11.7%

Where to avoid in London based on YoY figures?

Knife crime in the Borough of Enfield is +52.2%

Islamophobia in Westminster is +95.4%

Homicide in Southwark is +83.3%

Anti-Semitic hate crime in Harrow +228.6%

Taser Deployments year on year in Feb 2018: +8.7%

15% of the 2649 Taser deployments were in Lambeth and Tower Hamlets.

Is it a question of police being hamstrung from taking more heavy handed responses to crime by enforcing political correct responses or are they just too stretched?

From the London General Assembly:

“Since 2010-11, the Met’s general grant funding from the Government has fallen by more than £700 million, or nearly 40 per cent in real terms, on a like-for-like basis. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, will commit today to investing an additional £110million into the Metropolitan Police in the next year.

Budget cuts have led to the loss of a third of police staff posts, which are down from 14,330 to 9,985, as well as two-thirds of police community support officer (PSCO) posts, which are down from 4,607 to 1,591. In addition, there are now 114 fewer police station front counters and 120 fewer police buildings.“

There were 1146 Anti-Semitic hate crimes against a 168,000 Jewish population in London vs 1,741 Islamophobic reported hate crimes against the 607,000 Muslims living in the British capitol. So Jews, per head of population, are 2.3x more likely to face hate crimes than Muslims according to the Met’s statistics.