______I suppose I should remember to sign in immediately as Hannibal when I come, so the guys whom I have set to “Ignore” never make it to my screen. There is one advantage in my forgetting to do so, however, and that is that I get an occasional glimpse of the daily party line over which the miscreants are frothing. It really is getting pretty wild, isn’t it?
______Here is Tamoshanter crying about Judd: “Think about it. He allows an employee like you to use fully his "free speech rights" to run a website attacking all of his personal enemies! He has the clearness of purpose to let you stalk and harass anyone who criticizes him. And you! Why, you've got the guts to kiss his ass right here on a message board!”
______At least Tamoshanter has cleared up one thing for me. I was beginning to wonder if he had the grey matter to process my claims. It appears he does, as in the quote above he was able to recreate them accurately, albeit it with a consistent error. You know, of course, that my claim is that there is an Establishment of powerful, wealthy Wall Street Elites whose ownership of the financial press is used both to manipulate stocks to the benefit of the hedge funds and prime brokers, and stalk, harass, and attack anyone who tries to expose their game. Their compliant financial press does their bidding, sucking up to the hedgies by running glowing articles about their latest acquisition of a $45 million penthouse or an $8 million stuffed shark. Tam seems to understand the architecture of the argument, but substituted me in for the Establishment, and Judd’s small website in for the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, New York Post, Fortune, etc.
_____Like many of them these days, Tam is in hysterics that another message is beginning to get to the public, a message that bypasses the mass media: Judd has created a website that exposes their lies and collusions, with articles that are better researched, more thoroughly documented, and in general adhere to a higher journalistic standard, than the swill they mass produce, and this tiny crack in their power and authority seems to be driving them nuts. One feels almost that back in Operations where these things are scheduled someone has made an error, and mistakenly pressed the button on two months of mass-produced identical hatchet jobs and they have all spitting out of the machine at once.
_____The claims they are making are so silly as to be unworthy of response, other than to demonstrate my point about trying to overwhelm simple truth with mass produced lies:
_____A year ago I put out a press release that began with these words: “Overstock.com Chairman and CEO Patrick Byrne said, ‘I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena.’”
You would think that this simple fact would make it difficult for anyone to claim that I have been unforthcoming about receiving an SEC subpoena. As a measure of the contortions to which they are driven in order to maintain consistency, however, that is exactly the position that they are now flogging with a vigor bordering on insanity and with Big Lie regularity reminiscent of the Nazis. Tam has thoughtfully provided a catalogue of examples. When reading them, remember, again, this opening sentence from my press release of May 9, 2006:
“Overstock.com Chairman and CEO Patrick Byrne said, ‘I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena.’” http://investors.overstock.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=131091&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=858248&highlight
Now read the quotes Tam adduces from such luminaries as:
Herb Greenberg of MarketWatch asks:
Why did Byrne wait nearly one full year to disclose that he, too, had received a subpoena?
Roddy Boyd of the New York Post writes:
An SEC attorney told The Post that while such disclosures should be made “promptly,” there was little chance that his actions would get him in trouble.
A former enforcement chief echoed this sentiment, adding, “If [the SEC] is looking at you, there [are] bigger fish to fry.” [Really? When Jim, Herb and all the gang received theirs, did that indicate there were “bigger fish to fry”? – Patrick]
For his part, Byrne suggested in a blog posting on the Overstock Web site that inquiries about the delay in disclosing the subpoena’s existence was further proof of the unethical connection between journalists and short-selling hedge funds.
[Yes, imagine that: having opened a press release with the words, “‘I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena,” it does, in fact, seem a bit strange to be accused of being non-forthcoming on this subject, and it raise questions regarding motives and connections. How odd of me. - Patrick]
Floyd Norris of the New York Times also asked Byrne about the subpoena, and his comments include:
…. Mr. Byrne says he has talked about the subpoenas in the past…
[If by “talked about the subpoenas in the past” Floyd is referring to that time I said, ““‘I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena,” then he has left unexplained how exactly he thinks this cover-up is working.]
Investigative journalist and Forbes.com writer Gary Weiss notes ….
I think it’s reasonable to suggest that an SEC subpoena received by Patrick Byrne, the CEO of Overstock, is both a legal/regulatory matter as well as a material fact.
[Well I’m not completely sure about some of that: for example, do the thousand or so documents and communications from certain of folks that have been recently turned over to me (quite lawfully), or the fact that the SEC wants them, count as “material fact[s]” vis a vis Overstock? That’s a toughie. Anyway, once again, how my opening a press release with the words, “I may be the first CEO in history to celebrate receiving an SEC subpoena” squares with their flailing claims is so recondite a matter that Gary, like all the others, does nothing but gloss over it.]
Tam to me: “I know, you don't want people to know you're up to your ass in hedge funds”:
As I say often, there is nothing wrong with hedge funds per se, what I ran was not a hedge fund, and my brother did run a hedge fund but now he runs an insurance company. When Tam rants like this he is just hoping that no one will find the dozens of places I have discussed this stuff. Send word back, Tam, it’s getting sloppy.
_____Tam (or someone Tam is quoting, but I’m not sure), says, “I bet Patrick wishes we’d all stop asking so many questions.”
_____Not at all, in fact, it's just the opposite: I want you fellows to go on and on and on with this. Keep raising the stakes. I have all the confidence of Twain’s proverbial “Methodist minister with four aces,” and I am enjoying putting my credibility on the line against the credibility of The NY Post (ahem), The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, etc. I'm enjoying watching these publications go all in trying to keep a lid on this one. Not simply because they're making one heck of a pot for me to win (though there's that, too,) but because, well... look up "Gotterdammerung" if the joke has not hit you yet.
_____So I say, keep at it, raise away. Please. Go for it. You're almost there.