“Fake It Till You Make It”: The Holmes Conviction is an Indictment of Business and Media Practices

(DoD photo/Glenn Fawcett)

The conviction of Elizabeth Holmes in 4 out of 11 counts was a measured verdict by the jury which spent weeks combing through the debris from her epic fall. Indeed, as with other high-profile cases in 2021, this jury showed our system at the best in carefully deliberating and reaching balanced conclusions. The jury saw criminal fraud in Holmes’ dealings with investors while rejecting such claims with regard to patients. (It also hung on three counts). The distinction between the investors and patients was nuanced but principled. What the jury did not consider are those who helped Holmes create her elaborate scam. In many ways, the conviction is an indictment of those in business and the media who helped create the massive fraud that was Elizabeth Holmes.

Holmes was convicted of defrauding investors with false claims that the start-up Theranos company would revolutionize blood testing using a few drops of blood in a so-called “nanotainer.”

The three counts of wire fraud come with a 20-year maximum penalty while a conspiracy count has a maximum five-year penalty. Often courts will have the counts run concurrently, so she would be looking at a horizon of 20 years with an expectation of much less as a first offender. However, that is not a given. Holmes was convicted of a Bernie Madoff sized fraud with hundreds of millions lost to investors. Just under these counts, there was $144 million in losses. She also has denied all of the allegations, including on the stand. That might prompt the Court to consider a more severe framing of the sentencing in the case.

Holmes can expect a long prison stint, but she was able to engage in this fraud to build a counterfeit $9 billion company with the help of equally dishonest business and media cultures.

Silicon Kabuki

The prosecution put a spotlight on the fraudulent practices rampant in Silicon Valley where executives often invoke the rule that, to be successful, you have to “fake it till you make it.” It is often more than a simple adage to be bold and confident. The idea is that you can get away with fraudulent pitches as long as you use the money to make good on the pitch in the end. Under this logic, big frauds are better than small frauds.  If you get billions invested in your company, it is hard not to make something worth selling. Moreover, flaming out on a product is treated as a cost of doing business. Few executives are forced to account for their early pitches when their products flop.

Yet, few flame out like Holmes because she never really had a workable concept, let alone a product.  The case showed how she and her underlings sent out blood to be tested by more conventional means and did not have a working model. What she had was buzz, not a business.

Holmes was the perfect image of Silicon Valley shtick in her Steve Jobs black turtlenecks and child-genius act. This was performance art that followed the kabuki of the Valley for the techno super-wealthy class.

While everyone is focused on Holmes at the trial, they forget that she assembled a who’s who of powerful business and political board members who lent credibility to the scam. That included former U.S. Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretaries of Defense William Perry and James Mattis as well as an assortment of business and political elite. They furthered the mythology and Holmes was Jobs2.0. William Perry told The New Yorker in 2014 that Ms. Holmes “has sometimes been called another Steve Jobs, but I think that’s an inadequate comparison. She has a social consciousness that Steve never had. He was a genius; she’s one with a big heart.”

Politicians further legitimated Holmes, including then Vice President Joe Biden heralding her work as “the laboratory of the future.” Holmes was bona fide and celebrities lined up to herald the new visionary without a scintilla of evidence to back up her claims.

The Media Myth

Holmes would have been a modest fraudulent enterprise without the help of the media. The image of a young woman leading a multi-billion dollar corporation was “a fact too good to check.” Holmes was showered with attention from being featured by Bill Clinton to breathless features on virtually every network and newspaper.  With dozens of journalists doing puff pieces, virtually none actually looked into her product or the underlying technological claims. The exception was former Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou, who laid bare the fraud.

Holmes knew her audience. She was celebrated as the “new generation” of women in business, the brilliant female successor to Jobs.  To even question that narrative was to risk being accused of sexism. After all, would you have questioned Steve Jobs when he was developing Apple?

The answer is yes. Jobs faced huge skepticism over his company’s viability. Yet, Holmes was a fait accompli; she was proof in of itself. After all, she was a beautiful 19-year-old Stanford dropout who dressed like Jobs and spoke in soundbites.

Soon Holmes was on the cover of Fortune, which proclaimed “This CEO’s out for blood.” Glowing cover features would follow with Forbes and Inc. Television hosts cooed and columnists clamored over the carefully constructed image of a “female Steve Jobs.”

The Holmes story is all too familiar in the age of advocacy journalism. Coverage is now often about advancing a narrative and achieving social progress. Reporting has been supplanted by promoting images and messages. As Stanford journalism professor Ted Glasser explained “journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.” Celebrity journalism has many of the same flaws where images transcend the facts. In this case, Holmes was both a cause and a celebrity.

Holmes knew the media would shed the constraints of objectivity in favor of her irresistible story. She was the hero that the times called for, including Time magazine itself. Time gushed that Holmes was “striking, somewhat ethereal, iron-willed, she is on the verge of achieving her vision.” The fact that the vision turned out to be fraud is just another inconvenient fact. F. Scott Fitzgerald once said, “show me a hero and I’ll write you a tragedy.” Neither Holmes nor her tragedy were entirely self-made. It took a collective effort and this verdict should have come with a list of unindicted co-conspirators.

 

115 thoughts on ““Fake It Till You Make It”: The Holmes Conviction is an Indictment of Business and Media Practices”

  1. What are you having for dinner tonight?

    Elizabeth Holmes needs more blood. Not blood testing using a few drops of blood in a so-called “nanotainer.”

  2. Nice comment. but It is/was my understanding that medical journal editors and reviewers may nonethelessublish studies that may have imminent value to expand or alter clinical research, practice, etc. providing that the article’s abstract and onclusions expressly identify those caveats?

  3. In many ways, the conviction is an indictment of those in business and the media who helped create the massive fraud that was Elizabeth Holmes.

    Holmes was an amateur.

    Pfizer, Joseph Biden, & legacy media are engaged in a profitable ménage à trois.

    Pfizer has recently brought to market, thanks to Biden, an oral anti-viral COVID medication, Paxlovid, comprised of 2 drugs both belonging to the Protease Inhibitor class. One of the drugs, ritonavir, is an HIV drug. Paxlovid must be taken orally at the maximum 5 days from onset of COVID symptoms. COVID symptoms can take as long as 8-15 days to manifest post-exposure.

    The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application
    There were 181 confirmed cases with identifiable exposure and symptom onset windows to estimate the incubation period of COVID-19. The median incubation period was estimated to be 5.1 days (95% CI, 4.5 to 5.8 days), and 97.5% of those who develop symptoms will do so within 11.5 days (CI, 8.2 to 15.6 days) of infection. These estimates imply that, under conservative assumptions, 101 out of every 10 000 cases (99th percentile, 482) will develop symptoms after 14 days of active monitoring or quarantine.
    Stephen A. Lauer, Kyra H. Grantz, Qifang Bi, et al. The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application. Ann Intern Med.2020;172:577-582. [Epub ahead of print 10 March 2020]. doi:10.7326/M20-0504

    Yet, the fawning media is declaring Pfizer’s drug a game changer, a miracle, a breakthrough lifesaver. None of this is true.
    The indication for taking Paxlovid is 5 days but the untrained layman will not be able to distinguish COVID symptoms from Flu and common cold symptoms. Even if they can distinguish the illness and symptoms, the time period will have surpassed the window to take the drug to achieve efficacy once they see a physician to acquire a prescription and then take it to the pharmacy. Viral shedding (viral particles cleaving from one cell to enter another cell within an organism) occurs within 24-48 hours. Once past this time period, the virus will have already done its damage. Viral shedding leads to symptoms.

    Then there are the Paxlovid drug-drug interactions that are worrisome. Many of the drugs listed are popular in America.

    The COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel’s Statement on Potential Drug-Drug Interactions Between Ritonavir-Boosted Nirmatrelvir (Paxlovid) and Concomitant Medications
    https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/statement-on-paxlovid-drug-drug-interactions/

    The developing Pfizer / Biden scam was seen under Barack Obama and Roche Pharmaceuticals during the 2009 H1N1 Flu Pandemic that never materialized.

    In 1999, Roche Pharmaceuticals brought to market an oral antiviral Flu drug called Tamiflu (oseltamivir phosphate). It too had to be taken within a specified time period post exposure to Flu virus, 2 days, later extended to 5 days. When the WHO and Barack Obama sounded the alarm in 2009 about the upcoming Flu pandemic, it was a gift for Roche. The US Government, under Obama, threw millions of dollars at Roche for purchasing their Flu drug to stockpile the drug for minorities, the poor, the uninsured. Sound familiar? The efficacy of Tamiflu was a reduction in duration of symptoms of 2 days, a true embarrassment. Today, the WHO/ Obama / Roche debacle is seen as an example of corporate greed and manipulative tactics by WHO and Obama, to scare the American people and the world.

    Biden and Pfizer are doing the same costly mistake, to US taxpayers, that Obama did with Roche.

    Tamiflu campaign

    On 11 June 2009 Dr Margaret Chan, the director general of the World Health Organization, announced to the world’s media: “I have conferred with leading influenza experts, virologists, and public health officials. In line with procedures set out in the International Health Regulations, I have sought guidance and advice from an Emergency Committee established for this purpose. On the basis of available evidence, and these expert assessments of the evidence, the scientific criteria for an influenza pandemic have been met…The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic.”

    The following facts emerged:
    * WHO was recommending Tamiflu but had not vetted the underlying data.
    * EMA approved Tamiflu, but had not vetted the underlying data.
    * CDC was encouraging the use and stockpiling of Tamiflu on the basis of the 6-page manufacturer funded pooled analysis of 10 clinical trials, but had not vetted the underlying data.
    * CDC’s promotion occurred despite the fact that, since 2000, FDA, which had vetted the underlying data, required Roche to add a statement to Tamiflu’s product labeling: “Serious bacterial infections may begin with influenza-like symptoms or may coexist with or occur as complications during the course of influenza. TAMIFLU has not been shown to prevent such complications.”
    * The majority of Roche’s Phase III treatment trials were unpublished a decade after completion.

    BMJ 2010;340:c2912
    bmj.com/tamiflu

    Holmes was a novice when it came to screwing over stakeholders and observers. Biden and Pfizer have taken Holmes toddler experience and christened it with bling, as the legacy media marvels like the voyeurs they have proven to be. Roche got off scott free, unlike Theranos. Pfizer will follow Roche’s trajectory and surpass their profit earnings.

    Biotech giant Pfizer expects to generate $33.5 billion in Covid-19 vaccine sales in 2021, up from previous estimates of $26 billion, according to its second quarter earnings reports. These projections are based on the 2.1 billion doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine which the company expects to manufacture and deliver by the end of the year. The company generated $9.2 billion in vaccine sales in the second quarter of 2021 alone compared to $1.2 billion during the same period last year.

    – Forbes

    1. President Joe Blow is now telling Americans it is your patriotic duty to get jabbed with an experimental gene therapy that is *not effective and *not safe. But it is your patriotic DUTY.

      Misinformed coercion (*not informed consent!) coming straight from the senile occupier of the Oval Office.

      1. Anonymous: you are the one who is misinformed. None of the COVID vaccines qualifies as “gene therapy”. You don’t even know what “gene therapy” is in the first place. “Gene therapy” is used to treat defective genes in a human–replacing them with non-defective genes to cure illness. Vaccines are created by replicating the spike proteins found on the COVID organism, and when injected into a human, the vaccine stimulates the immune system to make antibodies. Not the same thing at all–not even close. Human genes aren’t used and not even actual COVID viruses are used–only lab-created genetic codes for the COVID virus spike proteins. After billions of doses worldwide, the vaccines have proven both safe and effective.

        And, yes, it is your patriotic and moral duty to help stop the spread of preventable communicable diseases, and to inform yourself about the facts instead of listening to to the lies put out by Fox News, OAN, Info Wars, News Max and Breitbart. Where do you and other anti-vaxxers derive any right to go around infecting others? People like you are the ones causing stress on the hospital systems in this country and unnecessary deaths. Take Puerto Rico as an example–80% vaccination rate, and they, too, are experiencing a spike in COVID + tests, but not hospitalizations or deaths. I saw an interview this morning with a Puerto Rican official who said the island recorded only one death from COVID since the current spike, and the reason is the high rate of vaccination. This proves that the vaccines are working.

        1. And, yes, it is your patriotic and moral duty to help stop the spread of preventable communicable diseases,

          Except for the fact respiratory viruses have never been preventable. But lets ignore ~200 years of virology.

          Remember, The vaccine does not prevent contracting, or spreading this virus

          1. You may recall when Tuberculosis disease was a thing. If you ever had a loved one or friend in the hospital with TB, the only way you had access to visiting face to face was wearing full protection head to toe, and the visit was allowed only for a brief period of time. This for a bacterial infection. Bacteria are many times larger than a virus. It is stunning how COVID Masks proponents remove their masks in the company of others to drink a beverage, consume food, gather in restaurants, etc. Its as if the virus suddenly did not exist just because they were eating food or drinking. This would have never been the case in the days of TB vigilance.

            1. Tuberculosis is STILL a thing, but not as much of a thing as it used to be, and one reason why was the spread was controlled. TB tests are still administered, especially if you have had contact with a positive case. They don’t have TB hospitals any more, and don’t intentionally cause a pneumothorax (collapse of a lung) to allow the lung to heal, but there are sporadic outbreaks. Testing known contacts and general surveillance via TB testing has brought it under control.

              1. Where do antibiotic resistant TB cases come from? South of the border, thanks to Joe Biden and his associates. Where do many different varieties of Covid come from? South of the border thanks to Joe Biden flying Covid+ people all over the country.

                Many years ago TB looked like it would end in this country, but those that looked deeper in the numbers could see that the future was going to see a rise in numbers.

                “and don’t intentionally cause a pneumothorax (collapse of a lung) to allow the lung to heal”

                Take a look at all the different therapeutics in the past. They even used pingpong ball like things to fill the chest cavity. People tried different things to find the best way of curing TB using appropriate medical knowledge. How does that differ from Covid, where the government is controlling what can or cannot be used, rather than permitting medical science to do its job.

                We can thank a lot of this lunacy on Joe Biden and his cronies that have denied Americans their rights.

              2. Im not sure what your experience with TB is but the prevalence of TB today in the USA compared to the 1950s/60s/70s is night and day. This isn’t even a disputed discussion. The nation achieved this success by increasing the rate of completion of therapy considering treatment duration is between 6-9 months. When patients abruptly discontinue treatment, the incidence of disease increases and antibiotic resistance emerges. Resistance has nothing to do with immigrants, a xenophobic argument.

                During 2020, the United States reported the lowest number of TB cases (7,174) and lowest incidence rate (2.2 cases per 100,000 persons) on record (TB Incidence and Mortality (Vital Statistics): 1953–2020).
                Except for 2015, the U.S. TB case count and incidence rate have declined every year since 1992, but the drop in 2020 was much steeper than previous years.

                The # of TB cases in the US in 1953 was 84,304; Incidence Rates per 100,000 was 52.6%.
                In 2020, # of TB cases was 7,174, with a rate of 2.2%.

                https://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/statistics/tbtrends.htm

                Wearing what we did in those days to prevent being contaminated by a hospitalized TB patient reminded me of the movie 2001 A Space Odyssey.

                People have short memories and prefer to think a deadly respiratory pathogen can be stopped with a surgical mask. Either it is deadly or it is not. Actions speak loudest. You cant have it both ways.

                1. This is when science had stature and public health leaders commanded respect…they earned it. Today, not so much

                  American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America: Controlling Tuberculosis in the United States
                  https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/10.1164/rccm.2508001

                  Compare the above 2005 ATS Guidelines for TB to what the CDC has in place today with COVID. The latter is insulting to everyone.

                2. “When patients abruptly discontinue treatment, the incidence of disease increases and antibiotic resistance emerges. Resistance has nothing to do with immigrants, a xenophobic argument.”

                  Estovir, when the comment, where does resistant TB come from, was made, it was to keep things short and understandable for Natasha. Antibiotic resistance has to do with people not being adequately treated. Decades ago, we started to see TB-resistant strains coming from Mexico. We had that in the US as well, but we had TB hospitals where TB patients could be placed if indigent or non-compliant. Antibiotic-resistant TB patients were also placed in such hospitals. For the most part, those hospitals are now gone. How exactly non-compliance is managed today is something I am unsure of.

                  In the 1970’s I think most people with antibiotic-resistant TB came from out of the US (That is what I recall, but I could be wrong.)

                  The argument made is not xenophobic. It’s based on what was reported many decades ago, perhaps while you were still in Cuba. It’s not good to assume xenophobia simply because someone provides an opinion about non-US citizens.

                  “The # of TB cases in the US in 1953 was 84,304; Incidence Rates per 100,000 was 52.6%.
                  In 2020, # of TB cases was 7,174, with a rate of 2.2%.”

                  You need to review the numbers in between. In the 1970s, there was talk of TB completely disappearing from the US. However, at the same time, one who looked carefully at the numbers could see that the numbers would rise partly because of resistant TB, much of it coming across the border.

          2. The vaccine does prevent serious illness, hospitalization, need for inbutation and death. That has been proven, and that is very much a benefit.

    2. Yeah, she’s the fall guy here… Small fry fed to the masses to sate their blood lust. The big fish go free, like usual.

      1. Grrlrocks says:

        “Yeah, she’s the fall guy here… Small fry fed to the masses to sate their blood lust. The big fish go free, like usual.”

        I would not be so sure about that. Trump is currently facing several investigations into his conduct as a private citizen and as President. It’s too early to tell, but it’s very possible that this big fish will not go free. Let’s hope.

        1. Trump’s actions in the private market were similar to the usual business practices of the day. Jeff doesn’t accept all the lost cases against Trump, including two impeachments. Leftist government prosecutors go for wins without concern for the law. There is nothing in NY that Trump faces that deserve prosecution. It’s all political.

          Listen to Howard Root and learn something an attorney should already know. Being prosecuted by a federal prosecutor is not a search for the truth. It is about a win, no matter the lack of ethics and morals. (Root refused to settle and won his case. The story makes one sick to recognize that prosecution occurs in America.)

          1. Turley WILL support the criminal conviction *if and when* Trump is found guilty. Wanna bet?

            1. You don’t believe in the law. If the first impeachment doesn’t work, try again is your motto. If suing Trump in NY fails once, do it again and again until there is victory. That is harassment, but you believe in harassing those you don’t agree with. You, however, can’t take the criticism or the debate leveled at you. You are a hypocrite.

              1. Turley WILL support the criminal conviction *if and when* Trump is found guilty. Wanna bet?

                1. What conviction? They have spied on Trump, lied about him, stolen his IRS documents, made all sorts of unethical if not illegal) document requests and have failed. He has been searched with a microscope, so I do not expect him to be convicted of any crime. You leftists are all alike.

                  Turley will agree with a lawful conviction, but will you agree with a lawful not guilty finding? Of course not. You have found Trump guilty of a crime and don’t even know what the crime is. That is pretty foolish, don’t you think? You have pigeonholed yourself into a box filled with fascists.

                  “show me the man and I will show you the crime” __Beria (Jeff’s hero)

                  1. You ask:

                    “Turley will agree with a lawful conviction, but will you agree with a lawful not guilty finding?”

                    YES. ABSOLUTELY. I have said so repeatedly.

                    The question is whether YOU will accept a guilty verdict when Trump claims that his conviction is a sham?

                    Yes or no? Answer!

                    1. You will agree to a lawful finding of innocence, but at the same time, you will create another trumped-up charge against him. That is your nature. Your agreement is that of a hypocrite.

                      “The question is whether YOU will accept a guilty verdict when Trump claims that his conviction is a sham? Yes or no? Answer!”

                      I’d be glad to answer if you would only tell me what the crime is that Trump supposedly committed. You won’t because you don’t accept the premise of innocent until proven guilty. That is the sign of one who doesn’t believe in the American standard of law.

                    2. I figured you would refuse to answer my direct question and not commit to accepting a guilty conviction of Trump *if* it so happens. Your evasiveness is why it is a waste of time to engage with Anonymous people.

                    3. I didn’t refuse to answer. You refused to provide the crime. That is evasive and foolish. Why should anyone answer such a ridiculous question where you can’t provide the crime? Beria would like your method, but he would likely shoot you in the back while you ran away.

                    4. I’m not the prosecutor! I am posing a HYPOTHETICAL question, you idiot. IF- I repeat- if Trump is ever convicted of a crime- WHATEVER it *may* prove to be- will you accept the jury’s verdict?

                      I will regardless. Turley will certainly.

                      You won’t say.

                    5. “I’m not the prosecutor! I am posing a HYPOTHETICAL question”

                      Jeff, when one sees a political hatchet job, one begins to wonder if the claims and testimony are lies. One also worries about jury pools. I worry about all high-profile cases.

                      We listened to you when Kyle Rittenhouse was arrested on absurd charges. We watched the MSM convict him in the press. We listened to all the leftists making claims that weren’t true. We listened to the prosecutor who left out part of the evidence, and that part would clear Rittenhouse.

                      Then we listen to you. Forget about prior legal issues Trump was involved with as a private citizen. The feds chose a high-profile real estate investor to go after to intimidate other high-profile real estate investors. They failed, but that didn’t stop them from trying again. We watched the suit regarding Trump University fail and fail again. It was dead until someone realized he could get a high fee by rerunning the case and settling due to Trump’s run for President. This settlement was a settlement of convenience, not guilt. (The Maverick schools initially run by the Biden Crime Family were likely fraudulent.)

                      Then we hear from you and people like you about all the suits Trump has had against him. The problem is that Trump won most of them, and he had no control over many where he didn’t win. Trump made money and helped save NYC while providing millions of people with wonderful things. You are probably living off of your family’s estate. We also heard about his private foundation. Did he do anything criminal there? No.

                      One has to know what they are talking about, Jeff, and you don’t. Do you know how many citizens NYS has gone after for taxes when they don’t live in the state? I know one case intimately where the defendant refused the settlement. The defendant won. He was initially advised to settle by prominent attorneys who stated the attorney fees would be $50,000 -$100,000, and there would likely be a settlement in the vicinity of $200,000+. All that on top of 3-5 years of harassment. That is why there are so many settlements where the innocent pay a hefty price.

                      We saw how the left dealt with Trump, spying on him, leaks, theft, lies and more lies. The left even went so far as to impeach him based on lies. You were happy. Then Trump won. Sadness pervaded your world until, once again, with similar lies and criminality, the left impeached him a second time. You were happy again until the impeachment failed. Now you will attempt to charge him with every crime you can create until he is finally found guilty, but not only that, you now have the audacity to ask in advance, will I agree with a verdict of guilty on a non-crime.

                      THAT IS THE QUESTION OF A FOOL WHO IS INTELLECTUALLY AND MORALLY COMPROMISED.

                2. Feeding the troll. Just to illustrate he is full troll.

                  What is the criminal charge? What specific crime is being investigated?

                  1. Will I be a troll if Trump IS convicted of a crime? You are clueless because you watch Fox News, Newsmax or OAN, and these networks ignore the criminal investigation of Trump.

                    1. Trump is a pig. He committed many crimes against humanity with his real estate empire. In Miami, he built a few hotels, and he relied on Latinos as his construction crew: meager wages, no health benefits, no sponsorship for employment, it was typical Trump. He treated his wives as badly. But so what? You are a criminal as well, as am I. We are all reprobates, broken, flawed, moral cripples who are fabulous hypocrites. From George Washington through the centuries, all men and women leading our country, and residing therein, have been hypocrites. What is your point, other than to show contempt towards Professor Turley, make every single issue about you, your concerns, your priorities, your analysis, your judgments, you, you, you? It’s hard to differentiate between you and Trump, Jeff. You know you’d gain more traction in your “arguments” if you conducted yourself with more decorum, more honor, more integrity, more dialogue. But otherwise, yeah, Napa Wine is good stuff. Send all of us a case of Silver Oak Cab, given how much you have made us suffer with your Trumpish behaviors.

                      sheesh

                    2. Estovir,

                      I confess that I used to collect Silver Oak when I first started out, but now Silver Oak is no longer considered the cult Cabernet is once was. I would gladly send you a bottle if I had any.

                      You flatter me for taking the time to write how you feel about me. Incidentally, I have long conceded that there is a little bit of Trump in all of us. And we should work very hard to keep those impulses at bay. However, I am going to continue to speak my mind on this blog notwithstanding that it enrages most lying Trumpists here.

                      I’m on a mission from God.

                    3. “Trump is a pig.”

                      Estovir, you are entitled to your opinion, but that is an inflammatory phrase that is meaningless. One has to question how you drew that conclusion and see whether it has meat or is meatless.

                      “he relied on Latinos as his construction crew: meager wages, no health benefits, no sponsorship for employment”

                      One has to wonder if Trump’s actions were so bad, why did people leave Cuba and come to the US knowing many would work for him or his type? In fact, if his wages were too low, why didn’t those people go and work for another builder?

                      How does the construction industry work? When one looks at a Trump facility, is it controlled by Trump or is it just the brand that is being ‘rented’? These are just a few things to consider that lead to your ultimate conclusion. If you were in Trump’s position, how would you manage things? We have had the same issues with lettuce over the years, but that involves Mexicans and others from south of our border.

                      How do you know he mistreated his wives? They have all made out quite well. Trump got divorced and had a lot of wives and bed partners even while married. That doesn’t make him evil. It might make him a bad Catholic. I have been married to one woman for a long time and never would even think of cheating on her. Does that make me a good Catholic?

                      You are right, however. We are all flawed. Religion allows some to be better, but religion is not required. Unfortunately, I have noted that with the absence of religion, too many stray to a new religion, leftism, which is cold and deadly to humanity. That leads me to believe religion isn’t as bad as some like to think. It can help anchor people and prevent them from straying, eventually permitting them to have a fuller and better life. Religiosity, however, sometimes gets a bit overbearing.

                    4. Take note world. JS is intellectually incapable of backing up his posts with a single fact. Call a person a criminal, but has no named crime.
                      This same troll claims President Trump lies, while he himself, can’t even muster up a nugget of truth to advance is narrative.

                    5. I’m telling you now, Iowan2, it’s increasingly likely that Trump will be criminally indicted and probably convicted of tax fraud or some other related crime. Turley and I will accept the jury’s verdict. You won’t. It’s just that simple.

                    6. “I’m telling you now, Iowan2, it’s increasingly likely that Trump will be criminally indicted and probably convicted of tax fraud or some other related crime.

                      This is the stupid man’s way (Jeff’s way) of rendering an opinion. Pick a side, but have no idea of what the crime is.

                    7. “We are all reprobates, [ad nauseam]”

                      The ugly head of original “sin” rears its head.

                      And yet, somehow, such “moral cripples” are capable of self-governance? Are deserving of freedom? Are able to handle the responsibilities of liberty?

                      That wicked idea about the inherent evil of man’s nature has always been the premise behind tyranny. And it continues to be.

                    8. probably convicted of tax fraud So or some other related crime

                      Trump does not figure his taxes. He has tax attorneys, and CPA’s do all the numbers. More than likely their is a full time IRS agent with an office in Trump Tower that rules live while the finacials are created monthly, quarterly, annually. So all of those professionals would also have to serve time for some crime you cant even name.
                      Fool

                    9. S. Myers

                      One has to wonder if Trump’s actions were so bad, why did people leave Cuba and come to the US knowing many would work for him or his type? In fact, if his wages were too low, why didn’t those people go and work for another builder?

                      Trump built his hotels in Miami Beach / Sunny Isles Beach back in the 2000s. Cubans by then were fully integrated into American society, had advanced degrees, prestigious careers, many of whom ran the local government, banks, major corporations. It would be helpful if you knew some of the relevant history regarding this discussion. An employer, no matter the industry, needs to provide just wages so that employees can partner with the employer to create an honorable product or service. Few US employers meet this metric today, i.e. unbridled capitalism. This is classic Catholic social teaching dating back 150+ years. See

                      RERUM NOVARUM
                      ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON CAPITAL AND LABOR

                      https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum.html

                      As for Trump’s marriages / relationships, I firmly believe you can judge a man by the way he treats women, e.g. JFK, Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich…the list is endless.

                      I too have never divorced. Marriage is not easy but how one treats their spouse, and children, reveals much about a person. As I have said many times on this blog, cells within our body must work together to make human life possible. We as humans should act just like our cells: reliance and cooperation with each other.

                      Trump is a pig. Sorry. My opinion though.

                    10. Estovir says:

                      “Trump is a pig.”

                      I agree. I would just add “lying” pig. Or don’t you think cheating on one’s wife necessitates a large degree of lying? And if one lies to one’s significant other, is there any doubt that he will lie to others less significant?

                      I commend you because I know that it is perilous to say what Trumpists don’t want to hear. I would not be surprised if you are banished for merely stating your opinion.

                    11. “It would be helpful if you knew some of the relevant history regarding this discussion.”

                      Estovir, it so happens I know Sunny Isles, Miami Beach and real estate (which includes building). I also happen to have a lot of immigrants in my family. One place of origin was Cuba, but I believe they left before you.

                      The first wave of Cubans brought in exceptional people. That did not continue, but I will say poor, wealthy, educated or not, Cubans by in large are good people. Aside from Miami, they are in Tampa in large numbers and elsewhere.

                      “An employer, no matter the industry, needs to provide just wages so that employees can partner with the employer to create an honorable product or service. ”

                      How does one determine just wages? Does some government bureaucrat come out to set the wages? No one forced anyone to work, and they were free to leave at any time. Do you realize that the construction company owner determines his employees’ wages? Are you telling us that Trump owned a construction company in Miami?

                      Trump has been accused of employment sexism, but in NYC, he hired women for top positions in his company while similar companies didn’t. Trump has been accused of anti-Semitism, but he has grandchildren that are orthodox Jews. His daughter converted. Trump has been accused of xenophobia, but all he has asked for, are immigration laws that are good for the American people. His businesses function better with more immigration, so his business instincts aren’t against immigration. I’m not sure what you think.

                      “As for Trump’s marriages / relationships, I firmly believe you can judge a man by the way he treats women”

                      How do you know he mistreats them? After divorce, all did pretty well, and they knew what they were getting into when they married him. Are we now going to add dictating personal behavior to having some bureaucrat control wages? 🙂

                      My extended immigrant family moved here to be free, not told how to act and what to do. We have faced discrimination and live with it without complaint because being free means having the right to discriminate. My wife was denied a job at a major US company when they found out she was Jewish. Initially, they desperately wanted to employ her because her skills were in such short supply. Did she threaten to sue? No. Did she hate them? No. In fact, she loved them because they didn’t want harm to come to her. They didn’t want to employ a Jew in a high position. She came from across the iron curtain, and her parents were in concentration camps during the war. That is something to worry about, not the petty cr-p we hear on the list.

                      Most of her family was murdered. I was lucky to be born here, but my grandmother and grandfather escaped from behind the iron curtain. She had seen her brothers killed in the streets during pogroms when they went out for food.

                      This country is the best in the world because it is free. One should not bring the politics one is escaping from to this country, but we see a lot of that.

                      You are entitled to your opinion about Trump, but I have found that he is a far more decent man than most. Man is a creature that has difficulty being moral all the time. Let’s recognize that and recognize that no one is pure. Let’s abide by a rule that permits each man and woman the ability to live their own lives.

                    12. “. . . to provide just wages . . .”

                      And “just wages” means something other than what the employer offers and the employee accepts? Who decides what those “just” wages should be? And how are they enforced?

                      (And, yes, such questions are a standard part of logic — designed to expose flaws in a person’s ideas, premises, and implications. It is also true that those with a dogmatist bent have always taken the position that: “We don’t ask questions like that here.”)

          2. The ONLY reason Trump wasn’t removed from office–he WAS impeached–is that it takes 2/3 to remove him. A majority voted against him the second time. In a real court of law, he would have been convicted. And, in NY, according to Michael Cohen, Trump kept 2 sets of books–one for Forbes rating and bank loan purposes, that jacked up the value of his assets–and a second set that downplayed the value of his assets for tax purposes. Some of these records have already come to light in other contexts, and it appears Cohen is telling the truth. Loan applications are signed under the penalties for perjury, so if you intentionally misrepresent the value of an asset as an inducement to obtain a loan, that is fraud. The same is true for falsifying assets on tax returns, which are also signed under oath.

            1. . In a real court of law, he would have been convicted
              In a real court of law there would have never been an investigation. There was never an accusation of crime.

              Cohen? That’s the line you choose to believe? Cohen?
              Two sets of Books? You need to provide a source for that bit of fiction
              Asset valuation, is a constant moving target. Property tax valuation is assessed by the county and city. It can be challenged, but the govt does not consider input from the property owner.

              Asset valuation for loans is the responsibility of the lending institution. The borrower can put a number on the collateral, The lender is free to loan as much or as little as they desire against that collateral listed.
              I paid a $half million piece of farm ground. I can value that piece at $800k if I want to. The lender is free to loan me only $100k, It is a business decison, I have broken no law, nor exposed my self to a perjury charge.

              This is exactly why all you TDS suffers are angry. You believe the media reporting, failing to understand there is NOTHING there.

  4. I followed this story for a long time and always it was too good to be true. As a physician, you have to have some skepticism about new treatments and processes. There are physicians who rush in with anything new and shiny, others who never change and those who exhibit some wise skepticism. Medicine is full of quackery to this day and that’s why nothing should be published without peer review. It is essential and always studies need to be consistently replicated by other centers who have a different point of view.. There have been debacles in medicine for years, such as the collapse of multiple medical co-ops after the passage of the affordable care act. Too many groups with no knowledge or experience in quality management, utilization management, health care knowledge or even simple administration. Or the utilization of bone marrow transplants for all sorts of malignancies which failed to show efficacy. Bone marrow transplants work for specific lymphoproliferative and hematologic malignancies but rarely elsewhere but bone transplant centers sprung up all over the country. There is an even longer list of others. Maybe people who were proficient in medical testing should have been interviewed and not media darlings and others totally out of their area of expertise.

    1. Funfact:

      The Constitution is for physician/free enterprisers too.

      Obamacare is unconstitutional…but then, so is the entire American welfare state.

      Imagine: Freedom, free enterprise, free markets and nearly tax free wealth generation – the thesis of the Founders.

    2. My understanding of bone marrow transplants for cancer is that they used extremely high levels of chemotherapy to treat certain cancers, like breast cancer, at dosage levels that would kill the bone marrow. So, before giving the chemo, they would extract the bone marrow and store it, give the chemo, and then put the patient into a strict isolation environment. After a period of time to clear the high levels of chemo, they would infuse the bone marrow, which would re-grow. The theory was that if some chemotherapy is good, more is better. That theory failed for everything other than cancers originating from in the bone marrow.

  5. Did no one in the medical community question the concept? How come Quest Diagnostics did not say “that’s pure BS?”

  6. Several years ago when this women was being written about and praised by the media as the next Steve Jobs, I posted probably dozens of times in the comments seconds of Yahoo, You tube etc about who utterly full of shit this women and her accomplices were. I expressed my dismay and disbelief at how she dupe inverters out of hundreds of millions. how cold they fall for this OBVIOUS scam? These were my comments years ago. and I often got attacked for them. I’m not clairvoyant, only reasonably smart. How did I know when so many others didn’t?

  7. She may not be a genius on blood analysis but I have to admire her genius for playing the media and the big boys as suckers. Kudos to her. She deserves a billion or two just for that. I wouldn’t do business with her or trust her, but I think I kinda like her.

  8. “fake it till you make it”

    That expression does not mean what you think it means.

    It predates Silicon Valley by decades. Contrary to your cynical interpretation, what it in fact means is: Be confident and positive, while on a journey to accomplish your goals.

    “The idea is that you can get away with fraudulent pitches as long as you use the money to make good on the pitch in the end.”

    BS.

    The actual idea is: Don’t let self-doubt and insecurity cripple you. If you think that SV traffics in “fraudulent pitches,” then you don’t know the first thing about how wealth is created, about high-risk start-ups (about 1 in 10 succeed), or about SV’s history of smashing successes.

    Your anti-business slip is showing, again.

    1. Your pro-SV slip is showing… You obviously don’t know how many pitches are made every day – nor do we! Don’t assume you do, unless you do AND you can back that up.

      1. “Your pro-SV slip is showing . . .”

        That’s not my slip. That’s my full dress. And I wear it proudly.

        “You obviously don’t know . . .”

        What I do know is the decades-long history of SV’s tremendous achievements — the very achievements that you use and enjoy, that make your life better — as you ridicule those who created them.

        Try to imagine your life *without* a computer (and the chips inside). Can’t? Thank SV.

        Try to imagine it without smart devices. Still can’t? Thank SV.

        Those computer chips that are in almost everything? Thank SV.

        Like your GPS mapping, financial program, e-payment service, online ordering and listening to music and watching movies ? Thank SV.

        That’s only a very small sample of SV’s achievements, and does not include the early-stage, high-risk financing of companies that are now household names. And that list does not include the Valley’s contributions to scientific knowledge and inventions.

        One of the monstrous injustices of this culture is those who benefit from a creator’s achievements — while condemning the creator.

  9. According to a WSJ article, Schultz actively conspired with Theranos to squash his whistle blowing grandson, forcing Schultz’s son to mortgage his house to defend the grandson.

    This was malice and probably conspiracy on the parts of both Schultz and Theranos (and Theranos’ lawyers).

    Obviously Schultz is dead, but the malice and conspiracy never got enough play.

  10. John Carreyrou of the Wall Street Journal should be recognized for having looked past the smoke screens and circle jerk PR to do what investigative Journalists used to do, ask questions and dig for answers. Mr. Carreyrou’s ability to ignore the hype, looks, and manufactured charisma of Elisabeth Holmes and ask serious questions regarding the viability of her claimed breakthrough technology was instrumental in revealing the truth about Theronos.

    1. John Carreyrou’s reporting will never receive any awards. The reporting that qualifies for awards such as a Pulitzer go to the biggest fabulists, such as Nicole Hannah-Jones and the 1619 Project.

    2. It’s also surprising that WSJ ALLOWED Carreyrou to actually follow the story, write it, and publish it! My thoughts are that she’s a little fish, being allowed to be fed to the masses in lieu of the REAL fish, the big ones that are engaged in way bigger schemes – such as the COVID “vaccines”, which are NOT vaccines but experimental gene therapy.

  11. would have been a modest fraudulent enterprise without the help of the media. The image of a young woman leading a multi-billion dollar corporation was “a fact too good to check.”

    As DC and the media do a full take over of the news cycles all this week, Remember this quote.

    There a dozens of Pulitzers left wanting, because the propaganda media is nothing but a mouth piece for the leftist mob.

    The only thing getting reported is the narrative.

    In this case, an attractive female(can I use that word) breaking huge innovations is exactly the narrative the left loves to push. Facts be dammed

    1. Yes, where are the indictments of the press for hoisting this petard way above where it should ever have gone? When will they be held accountable for THEIR frauds?

      1. Grrlrocks asks:

        “Yes, where are the indictments of the press for hoisting this petard way above where it should ever have gone? When will they be held accountable for THEIR frauds?”

        Fox News, Newsmax and One America Network are being sued for defamation for promoting the Big Lie. Not to worry. They are being held accountable for THEIR frauds.

        1. Not true. They are being sued for defamation of a company that likely wasn’t defamation. They will pay if they lose the case, but they had reason to believe what they did, unlike the Washington Post and NYT that have lost because their defamation was intentional.

      2. “. . . indictments of the press for *hoisting this petard* way above . . .” (Emphasis added.)

        And *that* expression does not mean what you think it means.

  12. It’s fascinating story and one I’ve been following for years. Of all the lies and deception, the biggest one may have been ol’ Lizzy herself. Dressed all in black and with a fake masuline voice, she was as phony as her idol, Steven Jobs, was weird. She fooled every old man from Gen. Mattis to SOS George Schultz crazy enough to hear her pitch and smell the perfume.

  13. Sometimes when following the leader, one follows that leader over a cliff.

    In this case, like in so many others, the media plays a part in the quackery. How can anyone trust the media that is so incompetent?

    1. The last time that I checked, the Wall Street Journal would be considered to be a part of the Main Stream Media. That being said, the WSJ is a lonely outpost surrounded by a media establishment that has become a partner in the “Woke” movement.

      1. Yes, Ray, you are correct. It is an outlier, but I don’t find its news end to live up to its reputation. It does have some great editorials.

  14. “Fake it till you make it.” That’s Trump and Biden and most politicians, which many of us blindly follow and give money to so they can build walls or build back better.

    1. The wall serves a demonstrable purpose. Mr. Biden and his former boss built nothing of substance in their first two rounds, and there’s no evidence Mr. Biden can build anything now, let alone anything better.

      1. Uh, what about the infrastructure bill Biden got passed with bipartisan support, and the COVID relief bill? You are just repeating drivel from Fox a few days ago. I saw part of the broadcast and laughed out loud at the dizzy broad who tried to make the case that Joe Biden and the Democrats have done nothing. In fact, hypocritical Republicans are taking credit for the projects their states will benefit from due to the infrastructure bill, even those who voted against it. But, as we all know, Republican voters are gullilble.

        Trump got nothing passed in 4 years’ time, other than a tax cut that mostly benefitted the ultra-wealthy. Biden has already beaten Trump: got an early approval rating of over 60% (Trump never broke 50%), got an infrastructure bill passed, something Trump never got done, and unemployment just set a 50-year low record. Biden is already beating Trump’s record less than a year into his administration. You claim “there’s no evidence” that Biden can succeed–he already has, and will continue to do so, but ReTrumplicans like you who rely on alt-right news won’t hear about this or believe it.

  15. the old boys club…love tanking women! There are 100 guys who have done worse…that never get punished!

    1. I don’t think you’re addressing the article’s salient point…the media’s complicity in her lie BECAUSE of her gender.

      That being said, I’ll name a male version of Elizabeth Holmes…

      …he goes by “Elon Musk”

      1. Not a big Musk fan but lets be honest here. Holms built a fraudulent box and ripped off hundreds of millions. Musk was able to something NASA is no longer capable of doing, he put Americans back in space.

Leave a Reply