Friday, June 26, 2020

Who Is The Next Wirecard?

From Zero Hedge:

Now that the multi-year saga of German fintech megafraud Wirecard is finally over, the pain is only just starting for disgraced German regulator BaFin (with the EU launching an investigation into its borderline criminal "regulation" which punished short sellers while never once looking at the real fraud).
Also let's not forget about the company's "auditor" EY (aka Ernst & Young), which as we learned today could have caught the WireFraud years earlier... if they had only done their damn job.
Which brings us to the next point: who is the next WireCard? To be sure in a time of frenzied buying where fundamentals don't matter (thanks Fed) and lax auditing standards in a world where stocks just go up no matter the news, it is only a matter of time before the other cockroaches are spotted.
One obvious place to start is a look at the other EY clients, which reveals something fascinating: virtually every company that is at the forefront of S&P500 leadership is currently a client of the disgraced auditor: from Apple, to Amazon, to Alphabet and Facebook! The four biggest and most popular companies in the world are currently audited by a company that ignored billions in missing cash for years. In fact, one could go so far as to say that if there is fraud in any one of these 4 names, it could singlehandedly unleash the next market crash.
The list of EY's top clients is shown below (ranked by market cap).
One wonders: if the rating agencies were the permissive factor for the 2008 crisis, will shoddy auditors be the straw that finally bursts the biggest bubble of all time?
But while that is certainly an important discussion, we will save it for another time, and instead shifting back to the most likely next usual suspect to implode under its own fraudulent weight, we go to a report published overnight by Neil Campling of Mirabaud Securities - best known for being the only analyst to correctly have a price target of zero for Wirecard - titled the next "Big Disaster" and which lists 20 warning signs to watch out for when seeking to short the next WireFraud.
1. Massively promotional CEO who actively looks for publicity and spends a lot of time courting Wall Street/investors etc and is very media savvy
2. Huge CEO/Senior Management compensation package NOT tied to cash flow or Earnings but just to Sales and/or the stock price, creating the possibility of egregious wealth creation if the stock goes up a lot. Huge pledging of collateral by the CEO in return for margin loans to fund a billionaire lifestyle
3. Management compensation generally way out of line with peers despite notably less profitability
4. Glossy future projections that have a habit over a long period of being proven to be too optimistic
5. Questionable product quality, ie defects (boon??) or debatable technological leads over similar products
6. Some evidence of self certifying, whether it be through strange international subsidiaries or not having an Auditor or experiencing unusual and slightly sudden end of quarter surges in revenues, up to and including the last day
7. Unusual or unverified and large Receivables in a business where the product is exchanged for cash up front
8. Evidence that the company is existing on a shoestring, not paying Suppliers, Employees, Landlords etc
9. Unusual margin progression, with SG +A going down over time despite a rising global footprint, or GM's staying flat despite much lower ASP's over time, for instance.
10. High levels of Gross Debt. Cash balances not matched by notable Interest Income thereby suggesting they are fraudulent
11. High employee turnover, especially in the LEGAL and FINANCE areas. Co-founders or Board members leaving.
12. Aggressive pursuit via paid third parties and/or “heavies” of any critics or people who have too many questions, which in any case are “boring”
13. Dislike of Hedge Funds
14. Possible Narcissistic Personality Disorder on the part of the CEO. Additional points if he/she uses Twitter a lot
15. Large cabal of outcasts/weirdos/bloggers/Twitter groups who have been saying for years that everything is amiss but just get a lot of criticism because the stock keeps going up ergo they must be idiots
16. Slowing top line growth rate despite all the hoopla and supposed “growth stock” status. Evidence of competitors rapidly eroding unsustainably high market share.
17. Loss making. Ideally never made a profit but likes to pretend it did or failing that, that it will for sure in 2-3 years due to highly questionable new products. But the 2-3 years gets pushed out constantly
18. Extensive use/exclusive use of NON-GAAP Accounting and occasional bridging to get from a Net Loss to a (small) Net Profit via poorly explained one-offs/Other Items/unusually large Credits of some kind in a desperate attempt to get into an Index by illicit means
19. Weak Board, preferably also small and ideally in hock in some way to the CEO, who therefore do his/her bidding. Helps if some of them are related physically to the CEO.
20. Gullible media, gullible analysts and dozens of paid bloggers who produce Price Targets out of nowhere based on “Option Value” or put another way products that are at least 5 years away from having any material impact.
There is one very famour company that checks every single one of the above boxes. In fact, it is a name that is very familiar to our readers. Which is why the only question we have at this point: is PWC starting to sweat?

DraftKings Insiders Dump $596 Million Of Stock On Unsuspecting Robinhood Daytraders

From Zero Hedge:

DraftKings Inc. filed several Form 4s with the Securities and Exchange Commission this week regarding insider selling by the president of the company, Paul Liberman, and others. 
Insider Transactions 
It turns out, as more than 100,000 Robinhood daytraders panic bought DraftKings since its Nasdaq debut in April, soaring 237% in months - Liberman and other insiders dumped a whopping $596 million worth of shares.
Robinhood Track 
On the pump, Liberman sold $31 million worth of stock, with about $15 million left. CEO Jason Robin sold $70 million worth of stock, while director Hany Nada liquidated $37 million. 
Clearly, by now, readers should understand the parabolic rise in DraftKings' shares was nothing more than a spectacular pump - as what comes next is likely the dump. 
But wait, there are more insiders dumping stock: Director Steven Joseph Murray sold $40 million worth of shares, while directors Shalom Meckenzie and John Salter sold collectively around $125 million. 
Howard Lindzon, the co-founder of StockTwits, recently noted the meteoric rise in DraftKings share price happened at a time when most sporting events were canceled because of the virus pandemic:
 "The chart of the day is Draft Kings, which has quadrupled to $12 billion now since it reverses merged into a shell and then changed ticker to $DKNG...unbelievable outcome considering the long regulated road and the fact that NO SPORTS !? Face with tears of joy."
What goes up must come down: Robinhood traders will soon learn a painful lesson on gravity. 

AGS Class Action Notice: Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit Against PlayAGS, Inc.

From Glancy Law

LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (“GPM”) announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada captioned Chowdhury v. PlayAGS, Inc., et al., (Case No. 20-cv-01209) on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired PlayAGS, Inc. (“PlayAGS” or the “Company”) (NYSE: AGS) securities between August 2, 2018 and August 7, 2019, inclusive (the “Class Period”). Plaintiff pursues claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).
Investors are hereby notified that they have 60 days from the date of this notice to move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this action.
If you suffered a loss on your PlayAGS investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at: https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/playags-inc/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-801-2829, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.
On August 7, 2019, PlayAGS reported a net loss of $7.6 million for second quarter 2019 which included a $3.5 million impairment to goodwill and a $1.3 million impairment to intangible assets of the Company’s iGaming reporting unit, due to extended regulatory timelines which delayed revenues.
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $8.99, or nearly 52%, to close at $8.31 per share on August 8, 2019, on unusually heavy trading volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that PlayAGS was experiencing challenges in its business in Oklahoma; (2) that, as a result, the Company’s recurring revenue would be negatively impacted; (3) that PlayAGS was experiencing challenges in its Interactive business segment, including delays in securing regulatory approvals and relevant licenses; (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, PlayAGS was reasonably likely to record a goodwill impairment; and (5) that as a result, Defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
Follow us for updates on LinkedInTwitter, or Facebook.
If you purchased PlayAGS securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than 60 days from the date of this notice to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Charles H. Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-801-2829, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.

Contacts

Glancy Prongay and Murray LLP, Los Angeles
Charles H. Linehan, 310-801-2829
www.glancylaw.com
shareholders@glancylaw.com


Thursday, June 25, 2020

Seattle Sued By Businesses, Residents Over CHOP

From Zero Hedge:

Over a dozen businesses, property owners and residents filed a class-action lawsuit against the city of Seattle on Wednesday over the decision to cede a roughly six-block area to BLM protesters, who then established the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) - now known as the Capitol Hill Occupying Protest (CHOP). 
Plaintiffs - which include several property management firms, an auto repair shop and a tattoo parlor, say the absence of police, firefighters and ambulances has subjected them to "extensive property damage, public safety dangers, and an inability to use and access their properties."
That said, the plaintiffs want everyone to know that they support Black Lives Matter "who, by exercising such rights, are bringing issues such as systemic racism and unfair violence against African Americans by police to the forefront of the national consciousness."
In short, they support the movement - just not the harms they've suffered as a result of it.
The occupation began after the Seattle Police Department decided to simply pull out of the neighborhood after days of escalations led to the deployment of tear gas and other crowd control measures. Instead of holding the line, SPD pulled out of the Capitol Hill neighborhood - after which rioters stormed the city's East Precinct and claimed it as their own.
Since then, there have been three shootings on consecutive nights which began last weekend.
In response, Mayor Jenny Durkan said that the city would shut CHOP down - by encouraging demonstrators to leave voluntarily so that police could retake their precinct.
Patty Eakes, an attorney for the plaintiffs, separately told Durkan in a letter Wednesday that she wanted the mayor’s office to provide a timeline by Friday for clearing out the protest and returning police, or the plaintiffs would ask the court for an immediate order that full public access be restored.
“City leadership have been on the ground daily having discussions with demonstrators, residents and businesses and trusted community-based, Black-led organizations to determine a path forward that protects the right to peacefully protest and keeps people safe,” the mayor’s office said in a written statement.
In the class-action lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, about a dozen businesses, residents and property owners said they had sometimes been threatened for photographing protesters in public areas or for cleaning graffiti off their storefronts. The owner of the auto shop Car Tender said a burglar broke in the night of June 14, started a fire using hand sanitizer as an accelerant, and then attacked his son with a knife when confronted.
The owner and his son managed to put out the fire and detain the burglar, the complaint said, but police never responded to their 911 calls. A large crowd of “CHOP participants” then came to the scene and forced the owner to release the arsonist, it said. -Washington Times
Other businesses said they were unable to send or receive packages because delivery companies refused to enter the protest zone, or because their loading docks had been blocked by barricades.
Plaintiffs are seeking damages for property damage, lost business, deprivation of their property rights and demand that full public access be restored to their businesses.
Read the complaint below:

Founding Member Of Black Panther Party Destroys BLM/Antifa

Pilgrim’s Pride PPC being investigated for possible violations of federal securities law

From GlancyLaw.com

Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (“GPM”), a national investor rights law firm, continues its investigation on behalf of Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation (“Pilgrim’s Pride” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: PPC) investors concerning the Company and its officers’ possible violations of the federal securities laws.  
If you suffered a loss on your Pilgrim’s Pride investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases-application/case-information/pilgrims-pride-corporation/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-879-1510, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.
On June 3, 2020, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pilgrim’s Pride Chief Executive Officer and others had been indicted “for allegedly conspiring to fix prices on chickens sold to restaurants and grocery stores.”
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $2.58, or over 12%, to close at $18.29 per share on June 3, 2020, thereby injuring investors.
Follow us for updates on LinkedInTwitter, or Facebook.
Whistleblower Notice: Persons with non-public information regarding Pilgrim’s Pride should consider their options to aid the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower Program. Under the program, whistleblowers who provide original information may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any successful recovery made by the SEC. For more information, call Charles H. Linehan at 310-801-2829 or email shareholders@glancylaw.com.
About GPM
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP is a premier law firm representing investors and consumers in securities litigation and other complex class action litigation. ISS Securities Class Action Services has consistently ranked GPM in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report. In 2018, GPM was ranked a top five law firm in number of securities class action settlements, and a top six law firm for total dollar size of settlements. With four offices across the country, GPM’s nearly 40 attorneys have won groundbreaking rulings and recovered billions of dollars for investors and consumers in securities, antitrust, consumer, and employment class actions. GPM’s lawyers have handled cases covering a wide spectrum of corporate misconduct including cases involving financial restatements, internal control weaknesses, earnings management, fraudulent earnings guidance and forward looking statements, auditor misconduct, insider trading, violations of FDA regulations, actions resulting in FDA and DOJ investigations, and many other forms of corporate misconduct. GPM’s attorneys have worked on securities cases relating to nearly all industries and sectors in the financial markets, including, energy, consumer discretionary, consumer staples, real estate and REITs, financial, insurance, information technology, health care, biotech, cryptocurrency, medical devices, and many more. GPM’s past successes have been widely covered by leading news and industry publications such as The Wall Street JournalThe Financial TimesBloomberg BusinessweekReuters, the Associated PressBarron’sInvestor’s Business DailyForbes, and Money.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Contacts
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, Los Angeles
Charles H. Linehan, 310-801-2829
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
www.glancylaw.com 
shareholders@glancylaw.com

Monday, June 22, 2020

GRPN Groupon reminder for investors who lost funds to file before the June 29 deadline as lead plaintiff

From Glancy Law

Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (“GPM”) reminds investors of the upcoming June 29, 2020 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of Groupon, Inc. (“Groupon” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: GRPN)  investors who purchased securities between November 4, 2019 and February 18, 2020, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
If you suffered a loss on your Groupon investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases-application/case-information/groupon/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-801-2829, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.
On February 18, 2020, Groupon reported fourth quarter 2019 sales of $612.3 million, a nearly 23% decline over the prior year period. The Company’s adjusted EBITDA for fiscal 2019 was reported at $227.2 million, a significant miss from its November 2019 forecast of $270 million. Groupon also announced a “transformational plan to exit Goods” in North America by the third quarter and globally by the end of the year.
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $1.35, or over 44%, to close at $1.70 per share on February 19, 2020, on unusually heavy trading volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company was experiencing fewer customer engagements in its Goods category; (2) that Groupon relied on its Goods category to drive its sales, especially during the holiday season; (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company was likely to experience reduced sales; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
Follow us for updates on LinkedInTwitter, or Facebook.
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Groupon securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than June 29, 2020 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit, please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-801-2829, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com.  If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Contacts
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, Los Angeles
Charles Linehan, 310-801-2829

INWK stock InnerWorkings is being investigated investors who lost money or those with info are encouraged to contact us

From GlancyLaw.com

Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP (“GPM”), a leading national shareholder rights law firm, continues its investigation on behalf of InnerWorkings, Inc. (“InnerWorkings” or “the Company”) (NASDAQ: INWK) investors concerning the Company and its officers’ possible violations of the federal securities laws.  

If you suffered a loss on your InnerWorkings investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/innerworkings-inc-1/.You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-801-2829, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.
On March 16, 2020, InnerWorkings issued a press release revealing the Company’s financial and operating results for the fourth quarter and full year 2019. Therein, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer stated that, “[a]s a result of the material weaknesses previously disclosed, insufficient evidence existed to support the recognition of revenue in arrangements containing bill and hold provisions. Therefore, we deferred the related revenue until product shipped from our warehouse.” 
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $0.36, or over 17%, to close at $1.68 per share on March 17, 2020, thereby injuring investors.
Follow us for updates on LinkedInTwitter, or Facebook.
Whistleblower Notice: Persons with non-public information regarding InnerWorkings should consider their options to aid the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower Program. Under the program, whistleblowers who provide original information may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any successful recovery made by the SEC. For more information, call Charles H. Linehan at 310-801-2829 or email shareholders@glancylaw.com.
About GPM
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP is a premier law firm representing investors and consumers in securities litigation and other complex class action litigation. ISS Securities Class Action Services has consistently ranked GPM in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report. In 2018, GPM was ranked a top five law firm in number of securities class action settlements, and a top six law firm for total dollar size of settlements. With four offices across the country, GPM’s nearly 40 attorneys have won groundbreaking rulings and recovered billions of dollars for investors and consumers in securities, antitrust, consumer, and employment class actions. GPM’s lawyers have handled cases covering a wide spectrum of corporate misconduct including cases involving financial restatements, internal control weaknesses, earnings management, fraudulent earnings guidance and forward looking statements, auditor misconduct, insider trading, violations of FDA regulations, actions resulting in FDA and DOJ investigations, and many other forms of corporate misconduct. GPM’s attorneys have worked on securities cases relating to nearly all industries and sectors in the financial markets, including, energy, consumer discretionary, consumer staples, real estate and REITs, financial, insurance, information technology, health care, biotech, cryptocurrency, medical devices, and many more. GPM’s past successes have been widely covered by leading news and industry publications such as The Wall Street JournalThe Financial TimesBloomberg BusinessweekReuters, the Associated PressBarron’sInvestor’s Business DailyForbes, and Money.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Contacts
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, Los Angeles
Charles H. Linehan, 310-801-2829
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100

Saturday, June 20, 2020

See The Video Youtube Banned Of California Doctors’ Exposing COVID-19 Hoax

From Dodgy Dossiers To The Sacking of Whitlam: The British Empire Stands Exposed

In my last article, I reviewed the case of Gough Whitlam’s firing at the hands of the Queen’s Governor General Sir John Kerr during a dark day in November 1975 which mis-shaped the next 45 years of Australian history. Today I would like to tackle another chapter of the story.
I used to believe as many do, in a story called “the American Empire”. Over the last decade of research, that belief has changed a bit. The more I looked at the top down levers of world influence shaping past and present events that altered history, the hand of British Intelligence just kept slapping me squarely in the face at nearly every turn.
Who controlled the dodgy Steele dossier that put Russiagate into motion and nearly overthrew President Trump? British Intelligence.
How about the intelligence used to justify the bombing of Iraq? That was British Intelligence too.
How about the Clash of Civilizations strategy used to blow up the middle east over decades? That just so happened to be British Intelligence’s own Sir Bernard Lewis.
How about the CFR takeover over of American foreign policy during the 20th century? That is the British Roundtable Movement in America (created as Britain’s Chatham House in America in 1921).
Who did Kissinger brag that he briefed more than his own State Department at a May 10, 1981 Chatham House seminar? The British Foreign Office (1).
How about William Yandall Elliot who trained a generation of neocon strategists who took over American foreign policy after the murder of JFK? Well, he was a Rhodes Scholar and we know what they are zombified to do.
How about the financial empire running the world drug trade? Well HSBC is the proven leading agency of that game and the British Caymen islands is the known center of world offshore drug money laundering.
Who ushered in the Cold War? Churchill.
Where did the nouveaux riche oligarchs go after Putin kicked them out of Russia? Back to their handlers in London.
What about the creation of ‘too big to fail’ banks that took over the world over the past decades? That was launched by the City of London’s Big Bang of 1986
Who created Saudi Arabia and the state of Israel in the 20th century (as well as both nations’ intelligence agencies?) The British.
What was the nature of the Deep State that Presidents Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, FDR, and JFK combatted within their own nations?
What the heck was the American Revolution all about in the first place?
I could go on, but I think you get my point.

The Disrupted Post-WWII Potential

Franklin Roosevelt described his deep understanding of British operations in America, telling his son in 1943:
“You know, any number of times the men in the State Department have tried to conceal messages to me, delay them, hold them up somehow, just because some of those career diplomats over there aren’t in accord with what they know I think. They should be working for Winston. As a matter of fact, a lot of the time, they are [working for Churchill]. Stop to think of ’em: any number of ’em are convinced that the way for America to conduct its foreign policy is to find out what the British are doing and then copy that!” I was told… six years ago, to clean out that State Department. It’s like the British Foreign Office….”
Where the British Empire certainly adapted to the unstoppable post-WWII demands for political independence among its colonies, it is vital to keep in mind that no empire willfully dissolves or “gives its slaves freedom” without a higher evil agenda in mind. Freedom is fought for and not given by empires which never had a reason to seek humility or enlightenment required for freedom to be granted.
In the case of the post-war world, the deliverance of political freedom among the “former British Empire” was never accompanied by an ounce of economic freedom to give that liberation any meaning. Although it took a few years to iron out America’s anti-colonial impulses over the deaths of such figures as JFK, Malcolm X, MLK and RFK, eventually the rebellious republic was slowly converted into a dumb giant on behalf of the “British brains” controlling America’s Deep State from across the ocean.

The Case of Africa and the Crown Agents

Take the case of Africa as a quick example: Over 70% of the mineral control of African raw materials, mining, and refining are run by companies based in Britain or Commonwealth nations like Canada, South Africa or Australia managed by an international infrastructure of managers called “Crown Agents Ltd” (founded in 1833 as the administrative arm of the Empire and which still runs much of Africa’s health, and economic development policies to this day).
Crown Agents was originally set up as a non-profit with the mandate to manage British Empire holdings in Asia and Africa and its charter recognizes it as “an emanation of the Crown”. While it is “close to the monarchy” it is still outside governmental structures affording it to get its hands dirtier than other “official” branches of government (resulting in the occasional case of World Bank debarment as happened in 2011).
In 1996 Crown Agents was privatized as ‘Crown Agents for Overseas Government and Administration’ where it became active in Central and Eastern Europe with its greatest focus on Ukraine’s economic, energy and health management. The agency is partnered with the World Bank, UN and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and acts as a giant holding company with one shareholder called the Crown Agents Foundation based in Southwark London.
A big part of Crown Agents’ program is designed to embed Africa with “green energy grids” as part of the anti-BRI OSOWOG Plan (surnamed “Sun Never Sets Plan”) announced by Modi in 2018.
“101 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) — most of them British — have mining operations in 37 sub-Saharan African countries. They collectively control over $1 trillion worth of Africa’s most valuable resources. The UK government has used its power and influence to ensure that British mining companies have access to Africa’s raw materials. This was the case during the colonial period and is still the case today.”
As we can see by this most summary overview of the modern imperial looting operations of Africa, the spirit of Cecil Rhodes is alive and well. This will take on an additional meaning as we look at another aspect of Rhodes’ powerful legacy in the 20th century.

The British Takeover of American Intelligence

Although many falsely believe that Britain was replaced with an American Empire after WWII, the sad truth on closer inspection is that British assets embedded in America’s early deep state (often Rhodes Scholars and Fabian Society assets tied to the Council on Foreign Relations/Chatham House of America) were behind a purge of leaders loyal to FDR’s vision for the post-colonial world. These purges resulted in the dismantling of the OSS months after FDR died, and the formation of the CIA in 1947 as a new weapon to carry out coups, assassinations and subversions of leaders within America and abroad seeking economic independence from the British Empire. This history was outlined brilliantly by Cynthia Chung in her paper Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny: Who is Really in Charge of the U.S. Military.
The Five Eyes grew out of these British imperial operations which essentially followed the mandate set out by Cecil Rhodes in his 7th Will calling for a new global British Empire and recapturing of the lost colony. In his will, Rhodes asks:
“Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States, and for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire…”
Later on in his will Rhodes stated: “Let us form the same kind of society, a Church for the extension of the British Empire. A society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed.”
Among the four Anglo-Saxon members of the Five Eyes that have the Queen as the official head of state (Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), all feature irrational forms of government structured entirely around Deep State principles organized within two opposing forms of social organizing: democratic and oligarchical… with the true seat of power being oligarchical.
Because this peculiar self-contradictory form of government is so little understood today, and because its structure has made Britain’s globally extended empire so successful, a few words should be devoted to it now.

A House Divided Against Itself…

In the case of Westminster-modelled Parliamentary systems, Senates represent the House of Lords, while Houses of Commons (for the Commoners) represent the elected parts of government. A prime minister selected by the governing party is assumed to be that nation’s leader, but unlike republican forms of government, instead of the “buck stopping there” (at least legally speaking), it is precisely there that the true sphere of power only begins to be felt.
Here parliamentary/quasi-democratic systems projected for public consumption find themselves enshrined within a much more shadowy and Byzantine world of Governor Generals (acting as the heads of state) who give Royal Assents to all acts and wielding the infinite prerogative powers of the Queen (aka: the “Fount of All Honors”). In the British Imperial system, hereditary power is seen as the source of all authority for all aspects of government, military, and economic- whereas in republican forms of government that authority is seen as deriving from the consent of the governed.
Where rights are “granted by the sovereign” within hereditary governments, republican forms of government recognize correctly that rights are fundamentally “inalienable” to humanity (in principle though not always in practice as the troubled history of America can attest).
By being essentially the legal “cause” of all authority among every branch of the British official and unofficial corridors of power, an obvious absurdity strikes which the empire would prefer plebs not think too seriously about: The queen and her heirs cannot themselves be UNDER any law, since they “cause” the law. This means that the queen, her heirs and anyone whom she delegates authority to literally have “licenses to kill”. The queen cannot be taken to court and she has no need of a passport or even a drivers’ license… since these items are issued by her crown’s authority alone. Within the logic of British legal systems, she cannot be held legally accountable for anything which the Crown has done to anyone or any nation of the world.
Although much effort goes into portraying the Crown’s prerogative powers as merely symbolic, they cover nearly every branch of governance and have occasionally been used… although those British spheres of influence where they most apply are usually so self-regulating that they require very little input from such external influence to keep them in line.
These powers were first revealed publicly in 2003 and in an article titled ‘Mystery Lifted on the Prerogative Powers’, the London Guardian noted that these powers include (but are not limited to):
“Domestic Affair, the appointment and dismissal of ministers, the summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Parliament, Royal assent to bills, the appointment and regulation of the civil service, the commissioning of officers in the armed forces, directing the disposition of the armed forces in the UK (and other Commonwealth nations), appointment of Queen’s Counsel, Issue and withdrawal of passports, Prerogative of mercy. (Used to apply in capital punishment cases. Still used, eg to remedy errors in sentence calculation), granting honours, creation of corporations by Charter, foreign Affairs, the making of treaties, declaration of war, deployment of armed forces overseas, recognition of foreign states, and accreditation and reception of diplomats.”
When a 2009 bill was introduced into parliament proposing that these powers be limited, a Privy Council-led Justice Ministry review concluded that such limitations would ‘”dangerously weaken” the state’s ability to respond to a crisis’ and the bill was promptly killed.
Acting on Provincial levels, we find Lieutenant Governors who (in Canada) happen to be members of the Freemasonic Knights of St John of Jerusalem (patronized by the Queen herself).
All figures operating with these authorities within this strange Byzantine world are themselves a part of, or beholden to figures sworn into the Queen’s Privy Council- putting their allegiance under the total authority of the Queen and her heirs, rather than the people or nation in which that subject serves and lives. If this is hard to believe, then take the time to listen to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s oath upon entering the Privy Council to get a visceral taste of this medieval policy in action (every cabinet member, Prime Minister and opposition leader must take this oath if they are to be granted intelligence briefings from her majesty’s intelligence services.)

Take note that not even once does the welfare of the people or the nation arise in this oath.

Standing Defiant Against Natural Law

Despite these un-natural power structures, history has shown that from time to time, good leaders have found themselves in executive positions of high office. As rare as they are, such anomalies occurred in the cases of Canada’s Prime Ministers Wilfrid Laurier (1896-1911) and John Diefenbaker (1957-1963), Quebec Premiers Paul Sauvé (1959), Daniel Johnson Senior (1967-68), and Australia’s Gough Whitlam (1972-1975). Yet when these anomalies arise and such figures trespass beyond their acceptable sphere of action into policy territories reserved only for the governing elite, then more often then not a Rhodes Scholar-run coup occurs [Laurier 1911 (2), Diefenbaker 1963], an untimely death strikes [Sauvé 1959 and Johnson 1968] or a sacking by the Queen’s Governor General happens [Whitlam 1975].
In all aforementioned cases, Democratic institutions that are premised around the concept that all citizens are made equal and free in the image of a creator are never long tolerated within the cage of a system of oligarchism premised upon the belief that only one person is sovereign and her/his word is absolute law for all slaves, and minions of the ruling bloodline.
As Gough Whitlam discovered in 1975, the real British Empire is a nasty beast, and probably one which should have gone extinct a couple of centuries ago. Unfortunately, until this moment, history has been tainted by more than a few disruptions of progressive leaders who sacrificed their comfort, careers, and often their lives to resist this stubborn parasite which would rather suck its host dry than admit that the system of organization upon which it is based is an abomination to natural law and morality.