Special Investigator Redux

There is a memo out there that is probably going to rock the world. It likely outlines the rationale behind the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Services Act) court approving a series of surveillance activities against Trump and his associated in 2016, in the run up to the 2016 presidential election. 

As noted previously in this blog, Trump et al actually were “wiretapped” by Obama’s government during the last presidential campaign – that certain persons like Manafort were “wiretapped” has been known for months now.  

The denial by Obama that Trump was being “wiretapped” was pure semantics – Trump claimed he was “wiretapped”, but no one “wiretaps” anymore, so when Obama denied this he was essentially denying an incorrect usage, not the act itself. And so, I think we are about to confirm that United States Government did have a presidential candidate under surveillance, and Obama was basically lying through his teeth in denying it.

The immediate problem with the information in the memo, and the rationale for the “wiretap” was that it was based on a dossier that not only is full of outright lies and distortions, but it was paid for by the Clinton Campaign and/or the Democratic National Committee. The court acted under false pretenses. 

What is the larger problem here?

If the information in the soon to be released memo is accurate, then a political campaign sponsored the creation of falsehoods in order to have the state go after a political opponent as part of an effort to win a political campaign. As we are talking about essentially stealing a presidential election, this would be a Conspiracy Against the United States of America – the same thing with which Manafort and Gates have been charged.

Using the state against your political opponents is right out of Putin’s playbook…and Mugabe’s…and the playbook of the Commies in China, and everywhere you find democratic governance sacrificed to the alter of political shenanigans, tyranny and the creation of “alternate truths”. 

The implications of this are grave for the Mueller investigation, as it suggest that the initial impetus for the investigation, namely the collusion allegation, may have been wrapped up in a pack of artfully crafted lies. There are still buckets of evidence tying Trump et al to the Russians, not the least of which is the fact that Manafort, Trump Jr, and Kushner did actually attend at a meeting with someone who they thought represented the Russian state for the purpose of working with that state through the receipt of damaging information to subvert a US presidential election. We know that Kushner actually had four meeting with Russians, not one. As well, there have already been two convictions of persons who lied about their contacts with the Russians as part of the Trump team – they clearly thought they had done something wrong, and their guilty minds led to their later convictions. 

This all suggest that there is more than enough to move forward with the Mueller investigation, but politics is about to interfere. Once the FISA memo is released, that investigation may collapse under the weight of indignation stemming from what may an historic manipulation of the US political process, easily rivaling Watergate.

What to do?

It is time for a second Special Prosecutor with broad powers to investigate not only the question of this dossier – including the activities of officials in the Obama administration - but all matters stemming from the Wiki Leaks disclosures in 2016, especially the activities of the Clinton Foundation, and Clinton’s use of an illegal internet server while she was Secretary of State. This person needs to carefully vet any FBI personnel for previous political comments and leanings, making sure that only persons who have maintained a neutral stance throughout may work on this matter.

On that, it has been revealed lately that numerous FBI operatives were engaged in e-mail discussions about the last presidential election where they expressed opposition to Trump, and/or favouritism to Clinton. Many very competent people engaged in this behavior. 

The FBI cannot survive as an institution of law enforcement if it is even lightly touched by the hint of political preference. These people – all of them – need to be walked to the door, basically now.

Trump Impeachment Update

They will interview Trump! Apparently, Mueller’s team, and maybe Mueller himself will interview Trump as part of the investigation into Russian influence in the last presidential election.

As has been noted in this space, the FBI is working hard to get all the lies on record, for follow-up with Obstruction of Justice charges when the bubble bursts and the rats start to sign like canaries. It is a well-worked scrip that has already netted them Papadopoulos and Flynn.  Nowhere is the arrogance that infects the White House more blatant and obvious that that in the person of Donald Trump. He lies shamelessly and endlessly, to a point where it seems that he may not actually be capable to telling truth from lies, or he doesn’t care, or he uses lies to rally his tribe, as was noted in the blog “The New American Prince and the Necessity of Lying.”

But you can’t lie to the FBI. You can refuse to answer questions courtesy of the fifth amendment, but if you do speak to them, you cannot lie. That is, and always has been, Obstruction of Justice.

Of course, if Trump is interviewed in person, he will lie. His only chance of avoiding being set up for an Obstruction of Justice charge is to ask that the questions come in writing, to be answered by his own lawyers – but I suspect he is to arrogant and narcissistic to allow for such a turn of events. 

Here are the lies that I suspect he will tell, confident that the cavalcade of make belief that is his White House will never crack thereby exposing the endless lies and prompting the downfall of the entire rotten edifice, especially the Liar in Chief.

He will tell the FBI that he had no knowledge of the June, 2016 meeting between Trump Jr., Kushner and Manafort, and purported representatives of the Russian government. Apparently his entourage had multiple meetings with the Russians, especially Kushner – he will also deny any knowledge of any of these.

He will deny that he had any knowledge of Papodopoulos’s contacts with the Russians shortly after he was hired by the campaign in the spring of 2016.

He will tell the FBI that he had no foreknowledge of the impending Wiki Leaks disclosure of Clinton-related e-mails, including the suspicion that the Russians were the source of these e-mails. 

He will tell the FBI that he had no knowledge of, nor did he direct, Flynn’s contacts with the Russians that occurred shortly after he won the presidency.

He will tell the FBI that he had no knowledge that Flynn may have engaged in illegal activities via his contacts with the Russians before very subtly asking Comey to drop any investigations of him. One of his own Tweets suggested that this is not true. His lawyers quickly took the fall for that Tweet, thereby saving Trump from having essentially confessed to Obstruction of Justice. (Note – if Trump knew that Flynn may have committed criminal acts BEFORE he asked Comey to drop the case, this would have, in itself, been a crime.)

He will deny that he has ever had, nor does he now have, any business dealings with Russians, especially those with ties to Putin.

He will deny any knowledge that his son-in-law and others may have been involved in business dealings with Russians, the purpose of which was to launder ill-gotten gains purloined from the Russian treasury.

He will deny that he has received any benefits from foreign sources of any kind while he has been President, including no net gains to his businesses. (The President of the United States is constitutionally-barred from receiving gifts from foreigners.)

He will deny common understandings of all of the lies and distortions that he has uttered since signaling that he will stand for office in 2016. If I were on Mueller’s team, I would recommend that the examination start with a review of his lies, lie after lie after lie, to put him on the spot, make him uncomfortable, and essentially invite him to repeat his lies.

I suspect that there is a series of e-mails out there that indicate that all of this is completely false. 

As I have noted in other blogs, I expect Trump to be impeached. The basis of this may be more than the fact that I think his son and son-in-law will be charged with Conspiracy Against the United States based on their illicit meeting with purported representatives of the Russian Government in June 2016, the expressed purpose of which was allowing that foreign government to influence a US presidential election. 

I now think that this man is so arrogant that he actually thinks he can outfox the FBI, and he will allow himself to be interviewed loudly maintaining that last bastion of “truthiness”….”I cannot tell a lie, and I have nothing to hide.” His lies will prompt an Obstruction of Justice charge that will be impossible to refute by even his most die-hard supporters in the corrupt US Press Establishment.

The irony is thick here. As I have noted in other blogs, I think he had to lie to get elected - they all do. And it will be, in part, because of his lies that he will be shown the door.

Bannon refused to answer any questions about Russia when he appeared before the Congressional committee probing links to Russia. Of course he did. Bannon understands the game very well indeed. Recall, he called the meeting with the Russians "treasonous" and wondered why they did not just call the police when they were contacted by the Russians. Exactly.

The American Economy in 2030

The US Congress has agreed to massive new tax cuts for American corporations and rich people. The theory is that giving tax cuts to rich people and corporations drives new investment that creates jobs and sparks new economic growth. The USA, under the influence of the Reagan Republicans in various iterations, has been implementing this theory for about 35 years now.

The USA has also been borrowing money at the fastest rate ever, outside of a major war. Recently, it has settled on borrowing of about half-a-trillion dollars a year.  The basic idea is that borrowing and spending sparks economic growth and creates jobs, by releasing the "animal spirits". The USA is now over $20 Trillion in debt. Think Keynes, run amok.

Finally, the USA has been stripping away many unionization and other workers protections and supports in the name of increased productivity and rendering jurisdictions "business friendly", often at the state level.

How have these theories and policies worked out, and what may we reasonably expect of some key aspects of the American economy should the USA continue on this path to 2030?

Real Income: American workers now earn basically what the earned shortly after Reagan started the "give money to the rich and everyone will benefit", trickle-down tax cut theory in the 1980s. Since the mid-1960's, median income in the USA, accounting for inflation is only up 21%. There has been very little comparative gain for the vast majority of Americans since the early 1990s. The rich, defined as the top 5% of income earners, now control more than 62% of the income in that country - the USA is not a middle class country, and has not been a middle class country for some time now.

See the inflation adjusted chart here.

https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/19/u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective

In 30 years, one would expect that the wealthy in the USA, defined as the top 5% of income earners, will control upwards of 70% of all income.

Employment: The official unemployment rate in the USA is 4.1%. This rate is U3 according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note that U3 only counts people who have been unemployed for three weeks or less – if you have been unemployed for three weeks and one day, you are not counted. The rate is therefore exceptionally misleading as a description of the actual unemployment situation in the USA.

The measure of U6 covers persons who are unemployed or underemployed (i.e. working part-time, but want a full time job) over a time frame of a full year.  This rate is just over 8%, which, from an historic perspective is actually pretty good. This is the rate that Janet Yellen looks at into help guide the policy of the US Federal Reserve Board.

The measure of U6 only covers a period of one year. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics does not track persons who are unemployed beyond one year, and has not done so since 1994. In short, the USA does not officially track the actual level of unemployment in that country, loosely defined as the percentage of the workforce that is either unemployed, or underemployed, and who would normally be seeking work.  

This rate is tracked by organizations like Shadow Stats, which seeks to apply the pre-1994 definition of unemployment, which looked at unemployed people (“long term discouraged workers”) who had been out of work for more than a year. According to Shadow Stats, the actual unemployment rate in the USA was about 15% in 1995, and is over 21% now using the measure of unemployment that was used prior to 1994. Very roughly, this is an increase in the actual unemployment rate of about 0.25% a year.

http://www.shadowstats.com/

While this may seem preposterous to some, the fact is that there are about 41 million Americans living on food stamps right now – this total was 16 million people in 2000, and 28 million in 2008, and is therefore rising by about 1.5 million people a year. These people are not working - it is as if every new citizen in the USA in the last 15 years or so has gone straight onto the rolls of those who are receiving food stamps. This is about 12.6% of the American population – one in eight people live in abject poverty in the USA. 

We also know that there are about 10 million able-bodied men in the USA – ages 18 – 54 – who are also not working. It should be obvious that it is impossible for the actual unemployment rate to be 4.1% when there are ten million unemployed men in that country, and 12.6% of the population lives on food stamps. 

If these trends continue, both for the unemployment rate and the number of people on food stamps, then by 2030 the USA should have about 60 million people, or about one in six Americans living on food stamps, and a real unemployment rate of about 25 – 26%.    

Labour Force Participation: In 2000, 70.1% of able-bodied Americans were in the workforce.  Today, that number is about 62.8%. With a workforce of about 155 million people, a drop of about 7.3% in labour force participation represents about 10 million fewer people actually working in the USA, with a drop of about 550,000 working people a year.   

The normal explanation for this phenomena is the fact that the Baby Boomers are retiring in droves, therefore there should be fewer people working.  The problem with this is the fact that, according to the St Louis Federal Reserve Board research, the only section of the US population to show a percentage growth in their membership in the US work force are people over 55 years of age.  Fewer and fewer people younger are actually working, as a proportion of the group.  So while the number of Baby Boomers entering retiring age is rising, so is the percentage of that population that is actually working.  This is not supposed to be happening, and it strongly implies that many Baby Boomers are not retiring, likely because they can’t afford to, and because they are actually working more as a proportion of their group, they are crowding out employment opportunities of younger persons.    

If this trend continues, by 2030 the USA should have an effective workforce of about 7 million fewer people, and a Labour Force Participation rate of about 58%. The Baby Boom generation will be severely limiting future prospects for young and middle aged people as it continues to work, given that they do not have enough to live on in retirement.  This could easily become the focal point for very damaging intergenerational economic, social and political strife.

US Government Debt:  This is simple. A wonderful site called “US Debt Clock” actually calculates US debt, both present and future, on a real time basis. It is simple to extrapolate where we will be in 2030.

As of today, with a deficit of about $725 Billion a year, and a debt of about $20.6 Trillion, the estimated US National Debt in 2030 will be about $29.3 Trillion. The yearly interest payments on this debt could easily top $800 Billion a year, and over 12% of the budget.  

Two or even Three Americas?: The USA appears to be doing very well economically at the moment. House prices have been rising for years, the stock markets are at historic highs, business profits are way up, and the unemployment rate for the America that actually counts is very low.   

The top 5% of income earners essentially own that country now. The next 30% of income earners is doing well enough, but the bottom 75%, and especially the bottom 40%, of the people in that country are suffering, and they are poised to suffer far more. They essentially count for next to nothing, and are not even included in some important statistics anymore. It is as if they are part of a different country.

The social, cultural and especially political implications of income inequality like this are profound. It may be that the only way the rich can keep the gains from 35 years of acquisitive tax policy on the part of their bought and paid for servants in the US Congress is to keep people from voting, because it should be obvious that almost no country on Earth will be more primed for a socialist revolt that the USA by 2030. 

The Sanderistas beckon.

Trump is Right on North Korea

North Korea has been trying to develop nuclear weapons since at least 1963, when the Soviet Union was asked to help them develop the bomb, and the Russians declined. Instead, they helped North Korea develop nuclear power for civil use. Much like India, once North Korea obtained nuclear know-how, they began to convert it to military purposes.

Their first reactor was operational in 1965, courtesy of Russian expertise. They started to develop their own civil reactor in the late 1970's, and a nuclear bomb development program in earnest in the early 1980's. 

In 1993, North Korea announced that it would leave the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The North Koreans had ratified this treaty in 1985, but the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors the treaty, reported non-compliance with a required safeguards agreement and a refusal to consent to specific inspections to the UN Security Council in 1993. The North Koreans announced their withdrawal from the treaty shortly thereafter, but backed off when the United States undertook to supply two light water nuclear reactors in return for North Korea suspending its nuclear weapons program (Undertaking 1).

This agreement collapsed in 2002, and about this time Pakistan admitted that North Korea had been given access to its nuclear weapons program technology. North Korea itself later admitted that it was not in compliance with the agreement it had made in 1993 to suspend its nuclear program.

In 2005, North Korea again withdrew from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In 2005, North Korea stated that it now had such weapons, but it again undertook to shut down its program (Undertaking II). It exploded its first nuclear weapon in 2006, confirming this in January, 2007.

Later in 2007, North Korea undertook to close its nuclear program as a part of a six nation agreement (Undertaking III). The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that it had shut down one of its reactors, and it started to receive aid thereafter. This agreement ended when North Korea launched a satellite in 2009, with the obvious implication that it had continued to work on missile technology. North Korea conducted a second nuclear test in May, 2009.

In February 2012, North Korea undertook to suspend Uranium enrichment and to suspect any more tests while negotiations with he United States continued. This included a moratorium on long-range missile tests (Undertaking IV). In return for this, North Korea was to get food shipments and negotiations to normalize relations. North Korea conducted a missile test in April of that year, and that agreement ended as well.

North Korea conducted a nuclear test in 2013 and two in 2016. In February, 2016, North Korea claimed to have put a satellite in orbit. 

In 2017, North Korea launched two ICBMs, the second of which could theoretically have reached the United States. North Korea also conducted another nuclear test, this time claiming that they have a hydrogen bomb.

The world has imposed sanctions, and is scrambling to get North Korea to the negotiating table in an effort to coerce or incite it to end a program that has been underway for about 40 years, where they have breached four previous undertakings to suspend this same program. North Korea has reopened a phone link with South Korea and has started talks again, perhaps related to joint participation at the Olympics. There is no hint that they intend to stop any nuclear-arms related activities.

As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me four times, shame on me."

This country, which operates like a Medieval Stalinist Monarchy, and which is in breach of about every single norm of basic human rights known to humankind, cannot be trusted to keep any agreement related to nuclear weapons. It sees the future of the regime, and the development of a nuclear-tipped ICBM capable of threatening this continental USA, as inexorably linked. If recent history is a guide, there is no way they will stop this activity no matter what agreement they sign.

So, what if the world just lets them continue, which is what negotiating an agreement actually means? 

Is the world ready for ten years from now, when North Korea will presumably have 20 - 50 ICBMs each armed with with nuclear weapons, which is surely what they intend to develop?

And, is the world ready for rogue states to acquire ICBM technology and actual missiles from North Korea, and maybe nuclear weapons as well, given that they already sell all the missiles they can to all comers to generate hard currency for their moribund economy?

And what about other countries? Will South Korea and Japan sit back idle while North Korea develops the ability to wipe them off planet earth? Is it not obvious that they will eventually look to "self help" in the form of their own nuclear programs?

If North Korea is permitted to continue on the road to nuclear proliferation, the future is very bleak indeed. Again, diplomacy will not work here - they do not abide by their undertakings.

But North Korea's ultimate target is the USA. No US President can allow this future to develop.

What to do?

As Trump has done, the USA must take a VERY firm stance with North Korea. 

It should be made clear that, should a North Korean ICBM test land off the continental USA, the Americans will have to make a military response - perhaps destroy North Korea's navy and air force to send the signal that they stand no chance in a conventional war, and impose a complete embargo - nothing in, and nothing out.  This could cause the North Korean military to act, overthrowing the present regime, and seeking real negotiations. If not, then at the very least it may change the calculus in Kim Jong Un's mind - the path of nuclear proliferation is not perpetual power, but the same future as that of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadaffi. 

This entails a massive risk to South Korea and to Seoul in particular, which is in artillery range of North Korea. The fact is that these guns have been pointed at Seoul for fifty plus years. This confrontation will come now, or only after North Korea has perfected a nuclear armed ICBM. I can't see how this risk can be avoided. Yes, this is a horrible situation.