Not Deep Enough

My shoulder aches – because my pockets have been picked .
The pain is chronic because of the pain inflicted by the government , which it inflicts – so it says – to ameliorate suffering .
It must say so because to say what it ’ s really doing – helping itself , to power , by reducing us all to a state of penury and dependence – would be .
.
.
unwise .
But what am I babbling about ?
It ’ s the same problem almost all of us whose pockets aren ’ t deep enough to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government has helped itself to our resources have .
I tore something in my shoulder – probably my rotator cuff .
I don ’ t know , exactly – because I can ’ t afford to get an MRI , which costs about $ 1,000 if you aren ’ t “ covered ” by health insurance , which I am not .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 I am not “ covered ” because insurance has been made unaffordable by the government – which “ helps ” by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and remediable problems to offset the cost of “ coverage ” of the chronically sick .
The result is more chronically sick – my shoulder issue , for instance .
And , more need of “ help.
” But it is a manufactured need .
I could afford to help myself – to pay for an MRI out of my own pocket – were it not for the fact that my pockets are empty .
Not because I haven ’ t earned the necessary money – or because I spent it on some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helped itself to my money .
Leaving me without enough money .
Every one of us who works – who isn ’ t earning enough to “ help ” the government help itself to power at our expense and leave enough left over to help ourselves – is in the same predicament .
Which is why almost everyone thinks they need the “ help ” of the government .
The $ 1,000 it would cost to get an MRI was spent – unwillingly – on my most recent rent installment , the money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ permitted to live in the house I paid for in full more than 15 years ago .
I am forced to pay rent in perpetuity on my home – in order to “ help ” finance the education of other people ’ s children in government schools .
My shoulder comes second .
The good news , I suppose , is that in a few years these kids will be forced to “ help ” me – by paying taxes , including Social Security taxes – which are not “ contributions , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it harder for them to help themselves ; to be able to afford a place of their own , for instance .
The Best of Eric Peters

My shoulder aches – because my pockets have been picked. The pain is chronic because of the pain inflicted by the government, which it inflicts – so it says – to ameliorate suffering.
To “help” people.
It must say so because to say what it’s really doing – helping itself, to power, by reducing us all to a state of penury and dependence – would be . . . unwise.
But what am I babbling about?
It’s the same problem almost all of us whose pockets aren’t deep enough to leave money enough to help ourselves after the government has helped itself to our resources have.
I tore something in my shoulder – probably my rotator cuff. I don’t know, exactly – because I can’t afford to get an MRI, which costs about $1,000 if you aren’t “covered” by health insurance, which I am not. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
I am not “covered” because insurance has been made unaffordable by the government – which “helps” by forcing the generally healthy with only occasional and remediable problems to offset the cost of “coverage” of the chronically sick. The result is more chronically sick – my shoulder issue, for instance.
And, more need of “help.”
But it is a manufactured need. I could afford to help myself – to pay for an MRI out of my own pocket – were it not for the fact that my pockets are empty. Not because I haven’t earned the necessary money – or because I spent it on some other thing – but because the government helped itself to my money.
Leaving me without enough money.
Every one of us who works – who isn’t earning enough to “help” the government help itself to power at our expense and leave enough left over to help ourselves – is in the same predicament.
Which is why almost everyone thinks they need the “help” of the government.
The $1,000 it would cost to get an MRI was spent – unwillingly – on my most recent rent installment, the money I am forced to pay to be permitted to live in the house I paid for in full more than 15 years ago. I am forced to pay rent in perpetuity on my home – in order to “help” finance the education of other people’s children in government schools.
My shoulder comes second.
The good news, I suppose, is that in a few years these kids will be forced to “help” me – by paying taxes, including Social Security taxes – which are not “contributions,” by the way. This will make it harder for them to help themselves; to be able to afford a place of their own, for instance.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Eric Peters


Changing Political Regimes?

In 48 countries simultaneously , there are very large demonstrations challenging the political regime of the state .
The supremacy of the democratic model , accepted by almost everyone at the end of the 20th century , is now being called into question .
For Thierry Meyssan , no constitutional system will solve today ’ s problems , which are primarily the consequence of values and behaviour .
On several continents , 48 peoples are currently rising up against their governments .
A movement of such magnitude has never been observed on a planetary scale .
After the period of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contestation of political systems and are imagining the emergence of new forms of government .
The nineteenth and twentieth centuries saw both the triumph of the use of elections and the enlargement of the electoral bodies ( free men , the poor , women , ethnic minorities , etc. )
.
The development of the middle classes gave more people time to take an interest in politics .
It has encouraged debate and helped to soften social mores .
Before Our Very Eyes , ... Thierry Meyssan Best Price : $ 20.52 Buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communication gave the opportunity to participate in public life to those who wanted to do so .
Presidents are not elected in response to social struggles , but because they can be elected today .
In the past , automatic successions were favoured , usually hereditary , but not always .
It was in fact impossible for everyone to be informed of public affairs and to give their opinion quickly .
Stupidly we have assimilated the sociological transformation of societies and this technical progress to a choice of regime : democracy .
Now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but a state of mind , an ideal : “ the government of the People , by the People and for the People , ” as Abraham Lincoln put it .
We soon realized that democratic institutions are no better than others .
They enlarge the number of the privileged , but in the end , they allow a majority to exploit a minority .
So we designed all kinds of laws to improve that system .
We equated the separation of powers with the protection of minorities .
However , the democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find that their opinions are no longer taken into account .
This is not due to the institutions , which have changed little in terms of substance , but to the way they are used .
Furthermore , after we have convinced ourselves , with Winston Churchill , that “ Democracy is a bad system , but it is the least bad of all systems ” , we realize that each political regime must respond to the concerns of people who are different according to their history , their culture ; that what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there or at another time .
We must be wary of vocabulary in politics .
The meaning of words changes over time .
They are often introduced with good intentions and misused with bad ones .
We confuse our ideas with the words we use to express them , but which others use to betray them .
I will therefore clarify in this text what I mean by the most important ones .
We need to re-examine the question of our governance .
Not in the fashion of Emmanuel Macron , who contrasts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to end the debate before it has begun .
These two words cover realities of a different order .
Democracy refers to a regime in which the greatest number of people participate .
It is opposed to oligarchy , where power is exercised by a few .
On the contrary , if we no longer talk about the number of people involved in the decision , but about how the decision is made , dictatorship refers to a regime where the leader , a military commander , may have to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
It is opposed to parliamentarianism .
The legitimacy of the Republic First and foremost , we must ask the question of legitimacy , that is , why do we recognize the government , and then the state , as being so useful that we accept their authority ?
We are obeying a government that we believe is serving our interests .
This is the idea of a “ republic ” in the Roman sense .
Thus , the kings of France patiently constructed the idea of “ general interest ” to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17th century onwards and from the experience of Oliver Cromwell .
Today , the United Kingdom and the United States are the only countries where it is claimed that there is no general interest , but only a sum – as high as possible – of disparate and contradictory interests .
The British suspect a priori that anyone who speaks of the general interest wants to restore Oliver Cromwell ’ s bloody Republican regime .
The United States wants every federal state to be republican ( i.e .
serving the interests of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not want the federal state – which they distrust – to be republican ( because , they believe , it can not serve the interests of all the components of this immigrant nation ) .
This is why a candidate in the USA does not present a programme setting out his vision of society as in the rest of the world , but a list of interest groups that support him .
The Anglo-Saxon thinking seems strange to me , but it is theirs .
I will continue my reflections with those peoples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest .
For them , all political regimes are acceptable , as long as they serve the general interest , which unfortunately is no longer generally the case in our democracies .
The problem is that no constitution can guarantee this service .
It is a practice , nothing more .
The question then arises as to the qualities necessary for the proper functioning of a political regime , whether democratic or not .
As early as the 16th century , Machiavelli had answered this question by stating the principle of “ virtue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not in any way understand a moral of any kind , but a form of disinterestedness that allows one to take care of the general interest without seeking personal profit ; a quality that almost all Western political personnel seem to lack today .
Machiavelli is often cited as the thinker of trickery in politics and described as a manipulator .
Certainly , he was not a naive man , but a man who taught both the prince how to use his power to triumph over his enemies and how not to abuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to develop virtue , but we know what made it disappear : we no longer have any respect for those who have money , we no longer have any respect for those who devote themselves to the general interest .
Worse still , when we find someone who devotes himself to the general interest , we think a priori that he is rich .
However , if we remember virtuous politicians , we know that they were only rich if they had inherited a fortune or earned money before entering politics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sharp ’ s work and the experience of colourful revolutions show us that , whatever political regime governs us , we always have the leaders we deserve .
No regime can last without the support of its people .
Therefore , we are collectively responsible for the lack of virtue of our leaders .
Even more than changing our institutions , we must therefore change ourselves and no longer consider others according to the thickness of their wallets , but first and foremost according to their virtue .
To virtue , the French @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not a moral or religious matter , nor was it a matter of any social welfare , but the brotherhood of arms of the soldiers of the second year .
They had volunteered to save the country from the Prussian invasion , in the face of a professional army .
Among themselves , they no longer differentiated between the aristocracy and the Third State , realizing their ideal of equality .
And they were victorious .
9/11 - the big lie Thierry Meyssan Best Price : $ 10.31 Buy New $ 77.74 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the anthem of the French Republic as well as that of the Soviet Revolution in its early days ( before the Gulag ) .
Its refrain is misunderstood today : To arms , citizens , Form your battalions , Let ’ s march , let ’ s march !
That impure blood Water our furrows !
It is wrongly interpreted as if we were going to water our furrows with the blood of our enemies .
But the blood of the tyrant ’ s soldiers can only poison our land .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impure blood ” of the People is opposed to the “ blue blood ” of the officers of the Prussian Empire .
It is the exaltation of the supreme sacrifice that founds the brotherhood of arms of the Revolutionaries .
The brotherhood of arms of the People corresponds to the virtue of the rulers .
The two answer each other .
Today we are living in a period not unlike that of the French Revolution : society is once again divided into orders .
On the one hand , there are leaders chosen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social morality through the media , and finally a third state that is being pushed back with tear gas and rubber bullets .
But there is no reason at the moment to die for the fatherland in the face of the interests represented by the thousand business leaders meeting in Davos .
In any case , people everywhere are looking for new forms of governance , in line with their history and aspirations .
The Best of Thierry Meyssan

In 48 countries simultaneously, there are very large demonstrations challenging the political regime of the state. The supremacy of the democratic model, accepted by almost everyone at the end of the 20th century, is now being called into question. For Thierry Meyssan, no constitutional system will solve today’s problems, which are primarily the consequence of values and behaviour.
On several continents, 48 peoples are currently rising up against their governments. A movement of such magnitude has never been observed on a planetary scale. After the period of financial globalization, we are witnessing a contestation of political systems and are imagining the emergence of new forms of government.
The “supremacy” of democracy
The nineteenth and twentieth centuries saw both the triumph of the use of elections and the enlargement of the electoral bodies (free men, the poor, women, ethnic minorities, etc.).
The development of the middle classes gave more people time to take an interest in politics. It has encouraged debate and helped to soften social mores. Before Our Very Eyes,... Meyssan, Thierry Best Price: $29.44 Buy New $24.97 (as of 05:40 UTC - Details)
The nascent means of communication gave the opportunity to participate in public life to those who wanted to do so. Presidents are not elected in response to social struggles, but because they can be elected today. In the past, automatic successions were favoured, usually hereditary, but not always. It was in fact impossible for everyone to be informed of public affairs and to give their opinion quickly.
Stupidly we have assimilated the sociological transformation of societies and this technical progress to a choice of regime: democracy. Now, democracy is not a law, but a state of mind, an ideal: “the government of the People, by the People and for the People,” as Abraham Lincoln put it.
We soon realized that democratic institutions are no better than others. They enlarge the number of the privileged, but in the end, they allow a majority to exploit a minority. So we designed all kinds of laws to improve that system. We equated the separation of powers with the protection of minorities.
However, the democratic model no longer works. Many citizens find that their opinions are no longer taken into account. This is not due to the institutions, which have changed little in terms of substance, but to the way they are used.
Furthermore, after we have convinced ourselves, with Winston Churchill, that “Democracy is a bad system, but it is the least bad of all systems”, we realize that each political regime must respond to the concerns of people who are different according to their history, their culture; that what is good here will not be good there or at another time.
We must be wary of vocabulary in politics. The meaning of words changes over time. They are often introduced with good intentions and misused with bad ones. We confuse our ideas with the words we use to express them, but which others use to betray them. I will therefore clarify in this text what I mean by the most important ones.
We need to re-examine the question of our governance. Not in the fashion of Emmanuel Macron, who contrasts “democracy” and “dictatorship” in order to end the debate before it has begun. These two words cover realities of a different order. Democracy refers to a regime in which the greatest number of people participate. It is opposed to oligarchy, where power is exercised by a few. On the contrary, if we no longer talk about the number of people involved in the decision, but about how the decision is made, dictatorship refers to a regime where the leader, a military commander, may have to make his decision without being able to debate it. It is opposed to parliamentarianism.
The legitimacy of the Republic
First and foremost, we must ask the question of legitimacy, that is, why do we recognize the government, and then the state, as being so useful that we accept their authority?
We are obeying a government that we believe is serving our interests. This is the idea of a “republic” in the Roman sense. Thus, the kings of France patiently constructed the idea of “general interest” to which the Anglo-Saxons were opposed from the 17th century onwards and from the experience of Oliver Cromwell. Today, the United Kingdom and the United States are the only countries where it is claimed that there is no general interest, but only a sum – as high as possible – of disparate and contradictory interests.
The British suspect a priori that anyone who speaks of the general interest wants to restore Oliver Cromwell’s bloody Republican regime. The United States wants every federal state to be republican (i.e. serving the interests of the local population), but they do not want the federal state – which they distrust – to be republican (because, they believe, it cannot serve the interests of all the components of this immigrant nation). This is why a candidate in the USA does not present a programme setting out his vision of society as in the rest of the world, but a list of interest groups that support him.
The Anglo-Saxon thinking seems strange to me, but it is theirs. I will continue my reflections with those peoples who accept the idea of the general interest. For them, all political regimes are acceptable, as long as they serve the general interest, which unfortunately is no longer generally the case in our democracies. The problem is that no constitution can guarantee this service. It is a practice, nothing more.
Republican virtue
The question then arises as to the qualities necessary for the proper functioning of a political regime, whether democratic or not. As early as the 16th century, Machiavelli had answered this question by stating the principle of “virtue”. By virtue, one should not in any way understand a moral of any kind, but a form of disinterestedness that allows one to take care of the general interest without seeking personal profit; a quality that almost all Western political personnel seem to lack today.
Machiavelli is often cited as the thinker of trickery in politics and described as a manipulator. Certainly, he was not a naive man, but a man who taught both the prince how to use his power to triumph over his enemies and how not to abuse his power.
We do not know how to develop virtue, but we know what made it disappear: we no longer have any respect for those who have money, we no longer have any respect for those who devote themselves to the general interest. Worse still, when we find someone who devotes himself to the general interest, we think a priori that he is rich. However, if we remember virtuous politicians, we know that they were only rich if they had inherited a fortune or earned money before entering politics, so they were generally not.
Gene Sharp’s work and the experience of colourful revolutions show us that, whatever political regime governs us, we always have the leaders we deserve. No regime can last without the support of its people.
Therefore, we are collectively responsible for the lack of virtue of our leaders. Even more than changing our institutions, we must therefore change ourselves and no longer consider others according to the thickness of their wallets, but first and foremost according to their virtue.
Revolutionary Brotherhood
To virtue, the French Revolution added brotherhood. Again, this was not a moral or religious matter, nor was it a matter of any social welfare, but the brotherhood of arms of the soldiers of the second year. They had volunteered to save the country from the Prussian invasion, in the face of a professional army. Among themselves, they no longer differentiated between the aristocracy and the Third State, realizing their ideal of equality. And they were victorious. 9/11 - the big lie Meyssan, Thierry Best Price: $7.89 Buy New $54.80 (as of 07:40 UTC - Details)
Their anthem, La Marseillaise, became the anthem of the French Republic as well as that of the Soviet Revolution in its early days (before the Gulag). Its refrain is misunderstood today:
To arms, citizens,
Form your battalions,
Let’s march, let’s march!
That impure blood
Water our furrows!
It is wrongly interpreted as if we were going to water our furrows with the blood of our enemies. But the blood of the tyrant’s soldiers can only poison our land. In the imagination of the time, the “impure blood” of the People is opposed to the “blue blood” of the officers of the Prussian Empire. It is the exaltation of the supreme sacrifice that founds the brotherhood of arms of the Revolutionaries.
The brotherhood of arms of the People corresponds to the virtue of the rulers. The two answer each other.
What’s next?
Today we are living in a period not unlike that of the French Revolution: society is once again divided into orders. On the one hand, there are leaders chosen from birth, then clerics dispensing their social morality through the media, and finally a third state that is being pushed back with tear gas and rubber bullets. But there is no reason at the moment to die for the fatherland in the face of the interests represented by the thousand business leaders meeting in Davos.
In any case, people everywhere are looking for new forms of governance, in line with their history and aspirations.
The Best of Thierry Meyssan


lewrockwell--2020-02-03--The Corporate Debt Bubble Is a Train Wreck In Slow Motion

There are two subjects that the mainstream media seems specifically determined to avoid discussing these days when it comes to the economy – the first is the problem of falling global demand for goods and services ; they absolutely refuse to acknowledge the fact that demand is going stagnant and will conjure all kinds of rationalizations to distract from the issue .
The other subject is the debt bubble , the corporate debt bubble in particular .
These two factors alone guarantee a massive shock to the global economy and the US economy are built into the system , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pillar of the false economy .
It has been utilized time and time again to keep the Everything Bubble from completely deflating , however , the fundamentals are starting to catch up to the fantasy .
For example , in terms of stock markets , which are now meaningless as an indicator of the health of the real economy , corporate stock buybacks have been the single most vital mechanism for inflation .
Corporations buy their own stocks , often using cash borrowed from each other and from the Federal Reserve , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the market and artificially boost the value of the remaining shares .
This process is essentially legal manipulation of equities , and to be sure , it has been effective so far at keeping markets elevated .
How an Economy Grows a ... Peter D. Schiff , Andre ... Best Price : $ 5.01 Buy New $ 7.53 The problem is that these same corporations are taking on more and more debt through interest payments in order to maintain the facade .
Over the period of a decade , corporate debt has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2007 , just before the credit crisis .
The official corporate debt load now stands at over $ 10 trillion , and that ’ s not even counting derivatives exposure .
According to the Bank for International Settlements , the amount of derivatives still held by corporations stands at around $ 544 trillion in notional value ( theoretical value ) , while the current market value is only around $ 10 trillion .
This is a massive discrepancy that can only lead to disaster .
In terms of debt-to-GDP , the credit cycle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the past 40 years .
This amount of borrowing always has consequences .
Even if central banks were to intervene on a level similar to TARP , which saturated markets with $ 16 trillion in liquidity , the amount of cash needed is so immense and the economic returns so muted that such measures are ultimately a waste of time .
The Federal Reserve fueled this bubble , and now there is no stopping it ’ s demise .
Though , they ’ re behavior and minimal response to the problem suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it anyway .
Currently , stock buybacks are set to decline this year , and I don ’ t think this is because corporations have decided they want to quit the tactic .
They have to quit , because the amount of debt they are accumulating is is now outpacing their falling profits .
Corporate profits peaked in the 3rd Quarter of 2018 and have been in decline ever since .
The Price-to-Earnings ratio as well as the Price-to-Sales ratio are now well above their historic peak during the dot-com bubble , meaning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared to the profits that corporations are actually bringing in .
As I warned back in 2018 , Trump ’ s tax cuts were a gift to corporations , not average people , and that gift was designed to be squandered as there was no doubt that companies would pour all extra cash into stock buybacks instead of innovation and new jobs .
This is exactly what happened .
While corporations , the Fed and Trump have been putting some effort into keeping stock markets from imploding , the real economy has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US manufacturing is in recession territory , US GDP is in decline ( even according to rigged official numbers ) , US retail outlets are closing by the thousands , the poverty rate jumped in 30 % of US counties in the past year , and high paying jobs are disappearing and being replaced with minimum wage service sector jobs .
To be sure , this process did not start under Trump , it ’ s been a slow motion train wreck for over a decade .
But , it ’ s important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing to mitigate the crash and his obsession with the fraudulent stock market shows that he has no plans to try .
The amount of time the tax cuts and debt increase bought was a couple of years .
That ’ s it .
With buybacks in decline , the question is what will keep the bubble afloat now ?
The Fed ?
That ’ s doubtful… Global corporations with the most VISIBLE debt include : Some companies , like Apple and Warren Buffet ’ s Berkshire Hathaway are holding extensive cash reserves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the level of cash reserves held by certain top corporations suggests they know something is on the horizon .
Why hold piles of cash when the stock market is a “ sure thing ” ?
Unless , the debt bubble is about to collapse and cash will be needed to absorb the damage ?
Stock buybacks , I believe , are the litmus test for how long the corporate world can hold out against the weight of the debt bubble .
2020 appears to be the year in which buybacks are set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 and the slide is set to continue this year .
This means profits are not going to come to the rescue and stave off the explosion of the debt structure ( once again , the problems of demand and debt intertwine ) .
All that is left is the Fed , as the “ buyer of last resort ” becomes the buyer of only import .
The Real Crash : Americ ... Peter Schiff Buy New $ 23.95 The list above , of course , does not include financial companies like JP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of harboring an extensive debt load and borrowing cash frantically through the Fed ’ s overnight repo markets .
These loans are now coming due , and the Fed has indicated it plans to tighten liquidity once again next month while returning to balance sheet cuts .
Interest rates remain well above zero , which means the more companies borrow through repo markets , the more interest they will accrue .
The Fed will have to institute a full QE program on the level of the TARP bailouts and cut interest rates to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repo liquidity threat and kick the can for a couple more years , and they ’ ve given no indication that they plan to do this in time to stop the current crash .
For now , Fed repo intervention has achieved little except keeping stocks at all-time highs .
The rest of the economy is in disarray .
The real economy will start to drag down the establishment ’ s favorite distraction – The Dow , as this process continues .
The big question is always one of timing .
How long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levitated ?
The situation is one of complacency and condition .
If people are suddenly confronted with an enormous forest fire surrounding their city , they will ask “ What can we do to save ourselves ?
” But what if people are surrounded by a forest fire for ten years and it hasn ’ t quite reached them yet ?
You warn them that the winds have finally changed and it is about to expand and take their homes and they will say “ What forest fire ?
” It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are no major shocks to the financial structure for the rest of the year .
With the corporate system tapped out and no longer able to act as a support for the bubble , the fundamentals will start to take over again .
Geopolitical events will also have a more visible effect .
A whole year without escalation with Iran ?
Without escalation with North Korea ?
Without a pandemic threat like the coronavirus going global ?
Without threats of a liquidity crisis as banks starve for more and more repo loans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important not to let complacency interfere with vigilance .
A slow motion train wreck is still ultimately a train wreck .
The damage can only be mitigated by removing one ’ s self from the train , and preparing for the fallout .
Do not think that simply because the system has been able to drag it ’ s nearly lifeless body along for ten years that this means all is well .
All bubbles collapse , and corporate debt has already sealed the fate of the Everything Bubble .
The Best of @ @

There are two subjects that the mainstream media seems specifically determined to avoid discussing these days when it comes to the economy – the first is the problem of falling global demand for goods and services; they absolutely refuse to acknowledge the fact that demand is going stagnant and will conjure all kinds of rationalizations to distract from the issue. The other subject is the debt bubble, the corporate debt bubble in particular.
These two factors alone guarantee a massive shock to the global economy and the US economy are built into the system, but I believe corporate debt is the key pillar of the false economy. It has been utilized time and time again to keep the Everything Bubble from completely deflating, however, the fundamentals are starting to catch up to the fantasy.
For example, in terms of stock markets, which are now meaningless as an indicator of the health of the real economy, corporate stock buybacks have been the single most vital mechanism for inflation. Corporations buy their own stocks, often using cash borrowed from each other and from the Federal Reserve, in order to reduce the number of shares on the market and artificially boost the value of the remaining shares. This process is essentially legal manipulation of equities, and to be sure, it has been effective so far at keeping markets elevated.
How an Economy Grows a... Schiff, Andrew J. Best Price: $1.99 Buy New $7.20 (as of 11:05 UTC - Details) The problem is that these same corporations are taking on more and more debt through interest payments in order to maintain the facade. Over the period of a decade, corporate debt has skyrocketed back to levels not seen since 2007, just before the credit crisis. The official corporate debt load now stands at over $10 trillion, and that’s not even counting derivatives exposure. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the amount of derivatives still held by corporations stands at around $544 trillion in notional value (theoretical value), while the current market value is only around $10 trillion. This is a massive discrepancy that can only lead to disaster.
In terms of debt-to-GDP, the credit cycle peak has spiked beyond any other peak in the past 40 years. This amount of borrowing always has consequences. Even if central banks were to intervene on a level similar to TARP, which saturated markets with $16 trillion in liquidity, the amount of cash needed is so immense and the economic returns so muted that such measures are ultimately a waste of time. The Federal Reserve fueled this bubble, and now there is no stopping it’s demise. Though, they’re behavior and minimal response to the problem suggests that they have no intention of stopping it anyway.
Currently, stock buybacks are set to decline this year, and I don’t think this is because corporations have decided they want to quit the tactic. They have to quit, because the amount of debt they are accumulating is is now outpacing their falling profits. Corporate profits peaked in the 3rd Quarter of 2018 and have been in decline ever since. The Price-to-Earnings ratio as well as the Price-to-Sales ratio are now well above their historic peak during the dot-com bubble, meaning, stocks have never been more overvalued compared to the profits that corporations are actually bringing in.
As I warned back in 2018, Trump’s tax cuts were a gift to corporations, not average people, and that gift was designed to be squandered as there was no doubt that companies would pour all extra cash into stock buybacks instead of innovation and new jobs. This is exactly what happened.
While corporations, the Fed and Trump have been putting some effort into keeping stock markets from imploding, the real economy has been evaporating. Global import/exports are crashing, US manufacturing is in recession territory, US GDP is in decline (even according to rigged official numbers), US retail outlets are closing by the thousands, the poverty rate jumped in 30% of US counties in the past year, and high paying jobs are disappearing and being replaced with minimum wage service sector jobs.
To be sure, this process did not start under Trump, it’s been a slow motion train wreck for over a decade. But, it’s important to point out that Trump has done nothing to mitigate the crash and his obsession with the fraudulent stock market shows that he has no plans to try. The amount of time the tax cuts and debt increase bought was a couple of years. That’s it. With buybacks in decline, the question is what will keep the bubble afloat now? The Fed? That’s doubtful…
Global corporations with the most VISIBLE debt include:
AT&T with $180 billion
SoftBank with $154 billion
Apple with $136 billion
Verizon with $114 billion
Comcast with $112 billion
AbInbev with $110 billion
General Electric with $115 billion
Shell with $77 billion
Microsoft with $67 billion
Some companies, like Apple and Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway are holding extensive cash reserves, but most do not. Also, the level of cash reserves held by certain top corporations suggests they know something is on the horizon. Why hold piles of cash when the stock market is a “sure thing”? Unless, the debt bubble is about to collapse and cash will be needed to absorb the damage?
Stock buybacks, I believe, are the litmus test for how long the corporate world can hold out against the weight of the debt bubble. 2020 appears to be the year in which buybacks are set to crumble. Corporate profits degraded over 2019 and the slide is set to continue this year. This means profits are not going to come to the rescue and stave off the explosion of the debt structure (once again, the problems of demand and debt intertwine). All that is left is the Fed, as the “buyer of last resort” becomes the buyer of only import. The Real Crash: Americ... Peter Schiff Buy New $23.95 (as of 05:55 UTC - Details)
The list above, of course, does not include financial companies like JP Morgan and other banks that are suspected of harboring an extensive debt load and borrowing cash frantically through the Fed’s overnight repo markets.
These loans are now coming due, and the Fed has indicated it plans to tighten liquidity once again next month while returning to balance sheet cuts. Interest rates remain well above zero, which means the more companies borrow through repo markets, the more interest they will accrue. The Fed will have to institute a full QE program on the level of the TARP bailouts and cut interest rates to zero in order to end the constant repo liquidity threat and kick the can for a couple more years, and they’ve given no indication that they plan to do this in time to stop the current crash.
For now, Fed repo intervention has achieved little except keeping stocks at all-time highs. The rest of the economy is in disarray.
The real economy will start to drag down the establishment’s favorite distraction – The Dow, as this process continues. The big question is always one of timing. How long can the delusional euphoria keep the system levitated?
The situation is one of complacency and condition. If people are suddenly confronted with an enormous forest fire surrounding their city, they will ask “What can we do to save ourselves?” But what if people are surrounded by a forest fire for ten years and it hasn’t quite reached them yet? You warn them that the winds have finally changed and it is about to expand and take their homes and they will say “What forest fire?”
It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which there are no major shocks to the financial structure for the rest of the year. With the corporate system tapped out and no longer able to act as a support for the bubble, the fundamentals will start to take over again. Geopolitical events will also have a more visible effect. A whole year without escalation with Iran? Without escalation with North Korea? Without a pandemic threat like the coronavirus going global? Without threats of a liquidity crisis as banks starve for more and more repo loans? I think not…
It’s important not to let complacency interfere with vigilance. A slow motion train wreck is still ultimately a train wreck. The damage can only be mitigated by removing one’s self from the train, and preparing for the fallout. Do not think that simply because the system has been able to drag it’s nearly lifeless body along for ten years that this means all is well. All bubbles collapse, and corporate debt has already sealed the fate of the Everything Bubble.
Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.com.
The Best of Brandon Smith


Military Slavery

During recent increased US-Iran confrontation , so many people viewed the Selective Service website to find out about the draft that the website crashed .
People were right to be concerned about a return of the draft .
With the ongoing military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan unlikely to end any time soon , and the possibly of the US being neoconned into war with Iran and possibly even Russia or China , the demand for troops is likely to rise .
At the same time , soldiers return home with lifelong medical problems , including psychological problems , causing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suicide .
All this can make it more difficult for the military to attract recruits .
And it can leave a Congress unwilling to pursue nonintervention with a choice : increase spending on troops ’ pay and benefits or bring back the draft .
A Congress facing an over 25 trillion dollars debt may reinstate the draft instead of further increasing spending on the troops .
Any future draft will probably include women , thanks to judges , politicians , and feminists who think women should have the “ opportunity ” to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Into Plowshares ... Ron Paul Best Price : $ 2.70 Buy New $ 9.27 A military draft violates the principle that individuals have inalienable rights that no government should violate .
A draft also puts all of our rights at risk .
If we accept that the government has the legitimate authority to force individuals to fight , kill , and die in a war , then how can we argue that the government can not force citizens to pay high taxes , purchase health insurance , or submit to TSA screenings ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ forbidding people from smoking marijuana or owning “ assault ” weapons ?
Many traditional conservatives , including Ronald Reagan , opposed the draft , pointing to its threat to individual rights .
Some antiwar individuals have endorsed the draft on the theory that a draft makes politicians less likely to support war .
But the draft did not stop politicians from supporting unnecessary wars like World War One , the Korean War , and the Vietnam War .
While the draft helped galvanize opposition to the Vietnam War , it took almost a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reach critical mass .
More importantly , the draft violates the nonaggression principle , which is the moral heart of libertarianism .
Advocating use of force to advance even as noble a goal as peace is itself immoral and sets back the cause of liberty .
Some antiwar progressives oppose a military draft but support forcing young people to participate in a “ national service ” program .
Some conservatives join these progressives to say that national service is a way for young people to “ pay back ” government for the privilege @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as if our rights and liberties are gifts from government .
Mandatory national service will likely gain support when the next market meltdown occurs , as it would serve as a jobs programs for young people .
All those who support liberty must be prepared to fight any attempt to reinstate the military draft or to mandate any other type of national service .
We must mobilize as many people as possible to tell the politicians it is unacceptable for the US government to enslave people in the military or otherwise .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil disobedience .
As Ronald Regan stated , the draft “ rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state… .
That assumption isn ’ t a new one .
The Nazis thought it was a great idea.
” The Best of Ron Paul

During recent increased US-Iran confrontation, so many people viewed the Selective Service website to find out about the draft that the website crashed. People were right to be concerned about a return of the draft.
With the ongoing military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan unlikely to end any time soon, and the possibly of the US being neoconned into war with Iran and possibly even Russia or China, the demand for troops is likely to rise. At the same time, soldiers return home with lifelong medical problems, including psychological problems, causing a horrifying number of veterans to commit suicide. All this can make it more difficult for the military to attract recruits. And it can leave a Congress unwilling to pursue nonintervention with a choice: increase spending on troops’ pay and benefits or bring back the draft. A Congress facing an over 25 trillion dollars debt may reinstate the draft instead of further increasing spending on the troops.
Any future draft will probably include women, thanks to judges, politicians, and feminists who think women should have the “opportunity” to be forced to join the military. Swords Into Plowshares... Paul, Ron Best Price: $4.00 Buy New $15.99 (as of 11:36 UTC - Details)
A military draft violates the principle that individuals have inalienable rights that no government should violate. A draft also puts all of our rights at risk. If we accept that the government has the legitimate authority to force individuals to fight, kill, and die in a war, then how can we argue that the government cannot force citizens to pay high taxes, purchase health insurance, or submit to TSA screenings? How can we argue against the government forbidding people from smoking marijuana or owning “assault” weapons? Many traditional conservatives, including Ronald Reagan, opposed the draft, pointing to its threat to individual rights.
Some antiwar individuals have endorsed the draft on the theory that a draft makes politicians less likely to support war. But the draft did not stop politicians from supporting unnecessary wars like World War One, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. While the draft helped galvanize opposition to the Vietnam War, it took almost a decade of American casualties for opposition to reach critical mass. More importantly, the draft violates the nonaggression principle, which is the moral heart of libertarianism. Advocating use of force to advance even as noble a goal as peace is itself immoral and sets back the cause of liberty.
Some antiwar progressives oppose a military draft but support forcing young people to participate in a “national service” program. Some conservatives join these progressives to say that national service is a way for young people to “pay back” government for the privilege of living in a free society, as if our rights and liberties are gifts from government. Mandatory national service will likely gain support when the next market meltdown occurs, as it would serve as a jobs programs for young people.
All those who support liberty must be prepared to fight any attempt to reinstate the military draft or to mandate any other type of national service. We must mobilize as many people as possible to tell the politicians it is unacceptable for the US government to enslave people in the military or otherwise. We must also support those who engage in civil disobedience. As Ronald Regan stated, the draft “rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state…. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea.”
The Best of Ron Paul, MD


Putin in Israel

As with its 40-year predecessor , the new US-Russian Cold War has characteristic features , including sharply conflicting historical memories .
Some of them are absurdly inaccurate and politically dangerous .
Consider a recent ramifying example .
On January 23 , Russian President Vladimir Putin was in Israel to commemorate Holocaust Remembrance Day and the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by the Soviet ( mostly Russian ) army .
Representatives of many other countries also attended the solemn events , including US Vice President Mike Pence , but according to the Times of Israel , Putin was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reason , widely acknowledged in Israel though scarcely in the United States today , is that the Soviet army , more than any other , saved the surviving Jews of Europe as it defeated Nazi Germany in route from Stalingrad to Berlin .
Ukrainians , most of them then Soviet citizens , played a large role in those historical events , both as Holocaust victims and as soldiers in the Soviet army .
Nonetheless , at about the same time as the ceremonies in Israel were underway , the inveterate bipartisan anti-Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representative Adam Schiff and a predictable slew of other lawmakers and impeachment witnesses—were declaring Ukraine today ’ s front line against Russia ’ s “ new aggression.
” Among other things , this was not the peace with Russia promised , and indeed sought since his election , by Ukraine ’ s new president Volodymyr Zelensky .
War with Russia ?
: From ... Stephen F. Cohen Best Price : $ 5.00 Buy New $ 8.50 At the very moment when peace between Ukraine and Russia is within reach , and with it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warmongering—an ugly but appropriate word—intensifies in Washington .
On December 4 , for example , in a formulation rarely heard since the early 1950s , a pro-impeachment witness , not known for any Russia , Ukraine , or related expertise , told Congress that the United States must make “ sure that the Ukraine remains strong and on the front lines so they fight the Russians there and we don ’ t have to fight them here.
” By January 22 , this had become a warfare mantra in Congress , with Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , also assuring members that America must “ fight Russia over there so we don ’ t have to fight Russia here.
” Whatever the merits of the impeachment process , its legacy , as I have warned from the outset , is likely to be an ever-worsening new Cold War and thus conceivably something even more dire .
Yet these fateful issues can not be candidly discussed in Washington because they are widely regarded , as NBC ’ s Chuck Todd mindlessly characterized them , as “ Russian talking points ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sometimes in direct accusations , anyone who does raise them is a “ Kremlin apologist.
” Such continues to be the state of American discourse about this new and more perilous Cold War .
Will any of the current Democratic presidential candidates change the discourse—or be permitted to do so by “ moderators ” of their debates ?
Or must we rely almost entirely on President Trump ’ s continuing , and substantially thwarted , effort to implement his campaign promise to “ cooperate with Russia ” ?
Looking ahead , Putin has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Square on May 9 , Russia ’ s “ Victory Day , ” a sacred commemoration of immense importance to the Kremlin and for most of Russia ’ s people .
Certainly , President Trump should accept , if only to honor the estimated 27 million Soviet citizens who died in World War II .
But here , too , will Washington politics and media discourage him from doing so ?
Listen to the podcast here .
The Best of Stephen F. Cohen

As with its 40-year predecessor, the new US-Russian Cold War has characteristic features, including sharply conflicting historical memories. Some of them are absurdly inaccurate and politically dangerous. Consider a recent ramifying example.
On January 23, Russian President Vladimir Putin was in Israel to commemorate Holocaust Remembrance Day and the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by the Soviet (mostly Russian) army. Representatives of many other countries also attended the solemn events, including US Vice President Mike Pence, but according to the Times of Israel, Putin was “the most formidable and dominant presence.” The reason, widely acknowledged in Israel though scarcely in the United States today, is that the Soviet army, more than any other, saved the surviving Jews of Europe as it defeated Nazi Germany in route from Stalingrad to Berlin.
Ukrainians, most of them then Soviet citizens, played a large role in those historical events, both as Holocaust victims and as soldiers in the Soviet army. Nonetheless, at about the same time as the ceremonies in Israel were underway, the inveterate bipartisan anti-Russian lobby in Washington—notably at this moment Democratic Representative Adam Schiff and a predictable slew of other lawmakers and impeachment witnesses—were declaring Ukraine today’s front line against Russia’s “new aggression.” Among other things, this was not the peace with Russia promised, and indeed sought since his election, by Ukraine’s new president Volodymyr Zelensky.
War with Russia?: From... Cohen, Stephen F. Best Price: $8.99 Buy New $8.50 (as of 02:15 UTC - Details) At the very moment when peace between Ukraine and Russia is within reach, and with it the possibility of saving many lives, warmongering—an ugly but appropriate word—intensifies in Washington. On December 4, for example, in a formulation rarely heard since the early 1950s, a pro-impeachment witness, not known for any Russia, Ukraine, or related expertise, told Congress that the United States must make “sure that the Ukraine remains strong and on the front lines so they fight the Russians there and we don’t have to fight them here.” By January 22, this had become a warfare mantra in Congress, with Democratic Representative Jason Crow, an impeachment manager, also assuring members that America must “fight Russia over there so we don’t have to fight Russia here.” Whatever the merits of the impeachment process, its legacy, as I have warned from the outset, is likely to be an ever-worsening new Cold War and thus conceivably something even more dire.
Yet these fateful issues cannot be candidly discussed in Washington because they are widely regarded, as NBC’s Chuck Todd mindlessly characterized them, as “Russian talking points” and “disinformation.” By implication, and sometimes in direct accusations, anyone who does raise them is a “Kremlin apologist.”
Such continues to be the state of American discourse about this new and more perilous Cold War. Will any of the current Democratic presidential candidates change the discourse—or be permitted to do so by “moderators” of their debates? Or must we rely almost entirely on President Trump’s continuing, and substantially thwarted, effort to implement his campaign promise to “cooperate with Russia”?
Looking ahead, Putin has invited Trump to join him on Red Square on May 9, Russia’s “Victory Day,” a sacred commemoration of immense importance to the Kremlin and for most of Russia’s people. Certainly, President Trump should accept, if only to honor the estimated 27 million Soviet citizens who died in World War II. But here, too, will Washington politics and media discourage him from doing so?
Listen to the podcast here.
Reprinted with the author’s permission.
The Best of Stephen F. Cohen


Humility

For several years I had had a subscription to the erudite British magazine The Spectator .
One article from 2002 , Making A Virtue Of Vice , that if I recall correctly ( it is behind a paywall ) contended that in our current culture the traditional virtues are now vices and the vices are virtues .
The Seven Virtues as listed in Wikipedia are given below .
It is worth pondering how each of them and the associated sin ( or vice as used in the Spectator article ) are integrated into our culture and even our own lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just one of these old outmoded virtues in terms of one field of endeavor ; that is , humility as applied to science .
Science , that is scientists and those who wield science for various political , economic , and social projects , take great pride in the power and truth of their science .
In this interview Richard Dawkins exemplifies this pride , or rather arrogance .
While Dawkins emphasizes evidence based truth , his science ; his historical , social , and cultural evidence is more obviously questionable .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of his statements ( I don ’ t object to all of them ) , but to make the point that he takes them as unquestionable .
That is , he doesn ’ t seem to examine his own beliefs as he counsels others to do .
In fact , if an examining spotlight were shined on the reality of modern scientific practice , the true humanity , the foibles , of science would be evident .
Because living in cohabitation with a pure search for evidence based truth there are all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think Climategate ) , like lie for funding , steal the ideas of others , and fabricate results for reasons of ambition , power , wealth , and even sex .
For example , listen to this interview of Bret Weinsten by his brother Eric , where he accuses a Nobel prize winner of stealing his own scientific glory .
In a general critique , Eric believes there is a 50 year period where great ideas have been buried ( DISC , distributed ideas suppression complex ) because they were highly disruptive to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credible enough in discussing science ( they drop names and know vocabulary ) such that their sour grapes sound credible to me .
Those using science as the sole arbiter of truth should own up to , what in my opinion are recent failures of science .
In general , there is a Reproducibility Crisis in science that everyone should know about .
Even the king of the sciences , physics , has its string theory debacle .
The food pyramid , which was purported to be scientific , has truly been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Dr. David Brownstein and Bill Sardi have provided ample evidence of the ambiguity of medical science and practice .
Besides the outright fraud and perverse incentives , there is just the ambiguous nature of human knowledge .
As finite beings we can only have a finite understanding .
In my own experience “ talking science ” with colleagues the phrase that I always feel the inclination to correct is “ we know that ….
” with “ the current consensus of some people in interpreting the known data is ….
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Lewis was able to describe superbly this problem of science in his book The Discarded Image : In every age it will be apparent to accurate thinkers that scientific theories , being arrived at in the way I have described , are never statements of fact .
That stars appear to move in such and such ways , or that substances behaved thus and thus in the laboratory—these are statements of fact .
The astronomical or chemical theory can never be more than provisional .
It will have to be abandoned if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposal which would ‘ save ’ the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions , or if we discover new phenomena which it can not save at all .
This would , I believe , be recognised by all thoughtful scientists today .
It was recognised by Newton if , as I am told , he wrote not ‘ the attraction varies inversely as the square of the distance ’ , but ‘ all happens as if ’ it so varied .
It was certainly recognised in the Middle Ages .
‘ In astronomy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ account is given of eccentrics and epicycles on the ground that if their assumption is made ( hac positione facta ) the sensible appearances as regards celestial motions can be saved .
But this is not a strict proof ( sufficienter probans ) since for all we know ( forte ) they could also be saved by some different assumption.
’ The real reason why Copernicus raised no ripple and Galileo raised a storm , may well be that whereas the one offered a new supposal about celestial motions , the other insisted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If so , the real revolution consisted not in a new theory of the heavens but in ‘ a new theory of the nature of theory ’ .
So please to all of those like Richard Dawkins ( or even Al Gore and Greta Thurnberg ) , concede the truth that science is far from infallible about the truths espoused in its name ; and when using some scientific fact , exhibit some humility .
For those interested , a conversation I have had on this topic with Karen Wong will appear on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Best of Ira Katz

For several years I had had a subscription to the erudite British magazine The Spectator. One article from 2002, Making A Virtue Of Vice, that if I recall correctly (it is behind a paywall) contended that in our current culture the traditional virtues are now vices and the vices are virtues. The Seven Virtues as listed in Wikipedia are given below. It is worth pondering how each of them and the associated sin (or vice as used in the Spectator article) are integrated into our culture and even our own lives.
Virtue Latin Gloss Sin Latin Chastity Castitas Purity, abstinence Lust Luxuria Temperance Temperantia Humanity, equanimity Gluttony Gula Charity Caritas Will, benevolence, generosity, sacrifice Greed Avaritia Diligence Industria Persistence, effortfulness, ethics Sloth Acedia Patience Patientia Forgiveness, mercy Wrath Ira Kindness Humanitas Satisfaction, compassion Envy Invidia Humility Humilitas Bravery, modesty, reverence Pride Superbia
Here I want to consider briefly just one of these old outmoded virtues in terms of one field of endeavor; that is, humility as applied to science. Science, that is scientists and those who wield science for various political, economic, and social projects, take great pride in the power and truth of their science.
In this interview Richard Dawkins exemplifies this pride, or rather arrogance. While Dawkins emphasizes evidence based truth, his science; his historical, social, and cultural evidence is more obviously questionable. It is not my purpose here to refute all of his statements (I don’t object to all of them), but to make the point that he takes them as unquestionable. That is, he doesn’t seem to examine his own beliefs as he counsels others to do. In fact, if an examining spotlight were shined on the reality of modern scientific practice, the true humanity, the foibles, of science would be evident. Because living in cohabitation with a pure search for evidence based truth there are all of the nasty things humans do (think Climategate), like lie for funding, steal the ideas of others, and fabricate results for reasons of ambition, power, wealth, and even sex. For example, listen to this interview of Bret Weinsten by his brother Eric, where he accuses a Nobel prize winner of stealing his own scientific glory. In a general critique, Eric believes there is a 50 year period where great ideas have been buried (DISC,distributed ideas suppression complex) because they were highly disruptive to an institutional order. The Weinsteins are credible enough in discussing science (they drop names and know vocabulary) such that their sour grapes sound credible to me.
Those using science as the sole arbiter of truth should own up to, what in my opinion are recent failures of science. In general, there is a Reproducibility Crisis in science that everyone should know about. Even the king of the sciences, physics, has its string theory debacle. The food pyramid, which was purported to be scientific, has truly been a plague on Americans. Regular LRC contributors such as Dr. David Brownstein and Bill Sardi have provided ample evidence of the ambiguity of medical science and practice. Besides the outright fraud and perverse incentives, there is just the ambiguous nature of human knowledge. As finite beings we can only have a finite understanding. In my own experience “talking science” with colleagues the phrase that I always feel the inclination to correct is “we know that ….” with “the current consensus of some people in interpreting the known data is ….” As for so many things, C.S. Lewis was able to describe superbly this problem of science in his book The Discarded Image:
In every age it will be apparent to accurate thinkers that scientific theories, being arrived at in the way I have described, are never statements of fact. That stars appear to move in such and such ways, or that substances behaved thus and thus in the laboratory—these are statements of fact. The astronomical or chemical theory can never be more than provisional. It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would ‘save’ the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all. This would, I believe, be recognised by all thoughtful scientists today. It was recognised by Newton if, as I am told, he wrote not ‘the attraction varies inversely as the square of the distance’, but ‘all happens as if’ it so varied. It was certainly recognised in the Middle Ages. ‘In astronomy’, says Aquinas, ‘an account is given of eccentrics and epicycles on the ground that if their assumption is made (hac positione facta) the sensible appearances as regards celestial motions can be saved. But this is not a strict proof (sufficienter probans) since for all we know (forte) they could also be saved by some different assumption.’ The real reason why Copernicus raised no ripple and Galileo raised a storm, may well be that whereas the one offered a new supposal about celestial motions, the other insisted on treating this supposal as fact. If so, the real revolution consisted not in a new theory of the heavens but in ‘a new theory of the nature of theory’.
So please to all of those like Richard Dawkins (or even Al Gore and Greta Thurnberg), concede the truth that science is far from infallible about the truths espoused in its name; and when using some scientific fact, exhibit some humility.
For those interested, a conversation I have had on this topic with Karen Wong will appear on her Youtube channel The Meaning Code.
The Best of Ira Katz


lewrockwell--2020-02-04--Who Should Not Have the Right To Vote?

Who Should Not Have the Right To Vote?

We often hear about who should have the right to vote , but rarely do we ever hear about who should not have the right to vote .
In 2018 , the states of Florida , Iowa , Kentucky , and Virginia were the only four states where convicted felons did not regain the right to vote after completion of all the terms of their sentences .
Then , in the November election , voters in my state of Florida approved Amendment 4 , the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative .
A 60 percent supermajority vote was required for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote of 64.55 to 35.45 percent .
The ballot summary read as follows : Thousands of Floridians with felony convictions registered to vote on January 8 , 2019—the day when Amendment 4 was officially implemented .
According to ThinkProgress , the amendment “ effectively restored the civil rights of 10 percent of Florida ’ s adult population , as well as one in five black Florida residents.
” Gun Control and the Se ... Laurence M. Vance Buy New $ 5.95 On May 3 , 2019 , the Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required convicted felons to complete “ all terms of sentence ” including full payment of restitution , or any fines , fees , or costs resulting from the conviction .
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed the bill into law on June 28 , 2019 .
The ACLU and the NAACP then announced a lawsuit with seventeen plaintiffs to block SB 7066 from taking effect .
On August 9 , 2019 , DeSantis asked the Florida Supreme Court for an advisory opinion concerning “ whether ‘ completion of all terms of sentence ’ includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — namely fees , fines and restitution ordered by the court as part of a felony sentence that would otherwise render a convicted felon ineligible to vote.
” On September 10 , 2019 , DeSantis asked a federal district court to delay the lawsuit until after the state supreme court issued its advisory opinion .
But on October 18 , 2019 , U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle ruled that “ each of these plaintiffs have a constitutional right to vote so long as the state ’ s only reason for denying the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plaintiff is genuinely unable to pay.
” The state appealed the judge ’ s ruling to the 11th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta .
On January 16 , 2020 , the Florida Supreme Court issued an advisory opinion stating that “ completion of all terms of sentence ” does include the satisfaction of all legal financial obligations .
On January 28 , 2020 , three judges for the Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case and appeared critical of the Florida legislature ’ s requirement that convicted felons pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and restitution to victims before being allowed to vote .
Although I personally don ’ t vote , I have mixed feelings about the various state laws that restore the voting rights of convicted felons .
According to Ballotpedia , as of December 2019 : • In two states , convicted felons always retained the right to vote : Maine and Vermont .
• In one state , convicted felons never regained the right to vote : Iowa .
The government may opt to restore an individual ’ s voting rights .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restored to a convicted felon immediately upon completion of prison and parole time : California , Connecticut , and New York .
• In eight states , felons with certain convictions never regained the right to vote .
The government may opt to restore an individual ’ s voting rights .
In Arizona , the government must opt to restore voting rights for individuals with two or more felony convictions .
Voting rights are automatically restored to an individual with one felony conviction upon completion of his or her sentence .
• In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting rights were restored to a convicted felon immediately upon completion of his or her prison sentence .
• In 19 states , voting rights were restored to a convicted felon upon completion of his or her sentence , including prison time , parole , and probation .
The war on drugs , which should not exist , and would not exist in a free society , has contributed to many Americans being convicted felons .
No American who is a convicted felon because of the drug war should ever be denied the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have the answer to the question of who should have the right to vote , but I have some thoughts on who should not have the right to vote .
It was once pointed out by economist Walter Williams of George Mason University : “ Many other programs ” is a great understatement .
We live in a transfer society .
In the report titled “ Marriage Penalties in Means-Tested Tax and Transfer Programs : Issues and Options , ” appendix B has a listing of 89 federal means-tested welfare programs organized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Child Development Child Care and Development Block Grant Childcare Entitlement to the States Head Start TANF Block Grant Child Care Education 21st Century Learning Centers Adult Basic Education Grants Aid for Graduate and Professional Study for Disadvantaged and Minorities American Opportunity Tax Credit Education for Homeless Children and Youth Gear-Up Pell Grants Special Programs for Disadvantaged ( TRIO ) Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants Title I Grants to Local Education Authorities Food Child and Adult Care Food Program Commodity Supplemental Food Program Farmers ’ Market Nutrition Program Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Needy Families Nutrition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Incentives School Breakfast School Lunch Senior Farmers ’ Market Nutrition Program Special Milk Program Summer EBT Demonstration Summer Program TEFAP—The Emergency Food Assistance Program WIC—Women , Infant , and Children Food Program Housing Home Investment Partnership Program ( HUD ) Homeless Assistance Grants ( HUD ) Housing for Persons with Disabilities ( HUD ) Housing for the Elderly ( HUD ) Low Income Housing Tax Credit ( LIHTC ) for Developers Native American Housing Block Grants ( HUD ) Other Assisted Housing Programs ( HUD ) Public Housing ( HUD ) Rural Housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Service ( Agriculture ) Section 8 Housing ( HUD ) State Housing Expenditures Medical Consolidated Health Centers/Community Health Centers Healthy Start Indian Health Services Maternal and Child Health Medicaid Medical Assistance to Refugees Medical General Assistance Refundable Premium Assistance and Cost Sharing Tax Credit SCHIP State Supplemental Health Insurance Program State and Local Hospital and Medical Care for Low Income Persons Services AmeriCorps/Volunteers in Service to America Community Service Block Grant Emergency Food and Shelter Program Family Planning Family Self-Sufficiency ( HUD ) Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Grants Independent Living ( Chafee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Training Vouchers Legal Services Block Grant Maternal , Infants and Early Childhood Home Visitation Safe and Stable Families Social Services for Refugees , Asylees and Humanitarian Cases TANF Block Grant Services Title III Aging Americans Act Title XX Social Services Block Grant The Free Society Laurence M. Vance Best Price : $ 13.95 Buy New $ 18.00 Training Food Stamp Employment and Training Program Foster Grandparents Job Corps Migrant Training Native American Training Senior Community Service Employment Senior Companions TANF Work Activities and Training WIA Adult Employment and Training ( formerly JTPA IIA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WIA Youth Opportunity Grants ( formerly Summer Youth Employment And these are just the means-tested programs !
If anyone should not have the right to vote , then certainly it should be those who benefit from these programs .
What a tremendous conflict of interest to allow a person dependent on government funds to vote in an election that may have an impact on the continuance or the amount of those funds .
I am more concerned about welfare recipients voting than I am about someone who steals a car and then “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his debt to society ” having his voting rights restored .
The Best of Laurence M. Vance

We often hear about who should have the right to vote, but rarely do we ever hear about who should not have the right to vote.
In 2018, the states of Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, and Virginia were the only four states where convicted felons did not regain the right to vote after completion of all the terms of their sentences.
Then, in the November election, voters in my state of Florida approved Amendment 4, the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative. A 60 percent supermajority vote was required for approval. The amendment passed by a vote of 64.55 to 35.45 percent.
The ballot summary read as follows:
This amendment restores the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation. The amendment would not apply to those convicted of murder or sexual offenses, who would continue to be permanently barred from voting unless the Governor and Cabinet vote to restore their voting rights on a case by case basis.
Thousands of Floridians with felony convictions registered to vote on January 8, 2019—the day when Amendment 4 was officially implemented. According to ThinkProgress, the amendment “effectively restored the civil rights of 10 percent of Florida’s adult population, as well as one in five black Florida residents.” Gun Control and the Se... Laurence M. Vance Buy New $5.95 (as of 11:36 UTC - Details)
On May 3, 2019, the Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill 7066. An amendment to the bill required convicted felons to complete “all terms of sentence” including full payment of restitution, or any fines, fees, or costs resulting from the conviction. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed the bill into law on June 28, 2019.
The ACLU and the NAACP then announced a lawsuit with seventeen plaintiffs to block SB 7066 from taking effect. On August 9, 2019, DeSantis asked the Florida Supreme Court for an advisory opinion concerning “whether ‘completion of all terms of sentence’ includes the satisfaction of all legal financial obligations — namely fees, fines and restitution ordered by the court as part of a felony sentence that would otherwise render a convicted felon ineligible to vote.” On September 10, 2019, DeSantis asked a federal district court to delay the lawsuit until after the state supreme court issued its advisory opinion. But on October 18, 2019, U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle ruled that “each of these plaintiffs have a constitutional right to vote so long as the state’s only reason for denying the vote is failure to pay an amount the plaintiff is genuinely unable to pay.” The state appealed the judge’s ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. On January 16, 2020, the Florida Supreme Court issued an advisory opinion stating that “completion of all terms of sentence” does include the satisfaction of all legal financial obligations.
On January 28, 2020, three judges for the Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case and appeared critical of the Florida legislature’s requirement that convicted felons pay back all court fees, fines, and restitution to victims before being allowed to vote.
Although I personally don’t vote, I have mixed feelings about the various state laws that restore the voting rights of convicted felons.
According to Ballotpedia, as of December 2019:
In two states, convicted felons always retained the right to vote: Maine and Vermont. In one state, convicted felons never regained the right to vote: Iowa. The government may opt to restore an individual’s voting rights. In three states, voting rights were restored to a convicted felon immediately upon completion of prison and parole time: California, Connecticut, and New York. In eight states, felons with certain convictions never regained the right to vote. The government may opt to restore an individual’s voting rights. In Arizona, the government must opt to restore voting rights for individuals with two or more felony convictions. Voting rights are automatically restored to an individual with one felony conviction upon completion of his or her sentence. In 17 states and Washington, D.C., voting rights were restored to a convicted felon immediately upon completion of his or her prison sentence. In 19 states, voting rights were restored to a convicted felon upon completion of his or her sentence, including prison time, parole, and probation.
The war on drugs, which should not exist, and would not exist in a free society, has contributed to many Americans being convicted felons. No American who is a convicted felon because of the drug war should ever be denied the right to vote.
I don’t have the answer to the question of who should have the right to vote, but I have some thoughts on who should not have the right to vote.
It was once pointed out by economist Walter Williams of George Mason University:
Tragically, two-thirds to three-quarters of the federal budget can be described as Congress taking the rightful earnings of one American to give to another American—using one American to serve another. Such acts include farm subsidies, business bailouts, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, and many other programs.
“Many other programs” is a great understatement. We live in a transfer society. In the report titled “Marriage Penalties in Means-Tested Tax and Transfer Programs: Issues and Options,” appendix B has a listing of 89 federal means-tested welfare programs organized under ten headings:
Cash
Adoption Assistance Title IV-E
TANF
Assets for Independence
Child Credit (refundable portion)
Earned Income Tax Credit (refundable portion)
State Refundable Earned Income Tax Credit
Foster Care Title IV-E
General Assistance Cash
General Assistance to Indians
Refugee Assistance (cash)
SSI/Old-Age Assistance
Child Care and Child Development
Child Care and Development Block Grant
Childcare Entitlement to the States
Head Start
TANF Block Grant Child Care
Community Development
Appalachian Regional Development
Choice Neighborhoods
Community Development Block Grant and Related Development Funds
Economic Development Administration (Commerce)
Promise Neighborhoods
Energy and Utilities
LIHEAP—Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
Universal Service Fund—Subsidized Phone Service for Low-Income Persons
Weatherization
Education
21st Century Learning Centers
Adult Basic Education Grants
Aid for Graduate and Professional Study for Disadvantaged and Minorities
American Opportunity Tax Credit
Education for Homeless Children and Youth
Gear-Up
Pell Grants
Special Programs for Disadvantaged (TRIO)
Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants
Title I Grants to Local Education Authorities
Food
Child and Adult Care Food Program
Commodity Supplemental Food Program
Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Needy Families
Nutrition Program for the Elderly, Nutrition Service Incentives
School Breakfast
School Lunch
Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program
Special Milk Program
Summer EBT Demonstration
Summer Program
TEFAP—The Emergency Food Assistance Program
WIC—Women, Infant, and Children Food Program
Housing
Home Investment Partnership Program (HUD)
Homeless Assistance Grants (HUD)
Housing for Persons with Disabilities (HUD)
Housing for the Elderly (HUD)
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) for Developers
Native American Housing Block Grants (HUD)
Other Assisted Housing Programs (HUD)
Public Housing (HUD)
Rural Housing Insurance Fund (Agriculture)
Rural Housing Service (Agriculture)
Section 8 Housing (HUD)
State Housing Expenditures
Medical
Consolidated Health Centers/Community Health Centers
Healthy Start
Indian Health Services
Maternal and Child Health Medicaid
Medical Assistance to Refugees
Medical General Assistance
Refundable Premium Assistance and Cost Sharing Tax Credit
SCHIP State Supplemental Health Insurance Program
State and Local Hospital and Medical Care for Low Income Persons
Services
AmeriCorps/Volunteers in Service to America
Community Service Block Grant
Emergency Food and Shelter Program
Family Planning
Family Self-Sufficiency (HUD)
Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Grants
Independent Living (Chafee Foster Care Independence Program)
Independent Living Training Vouchers
Legal Services Block Grant
Maternal, Infants and Early Childhood Home Visitation Safe and Stable Families
Social Services for Refugees, Asylees and Humanitarian Cases
TANF Block Grant Services
Title III Aging Americans Act
Title XX Social Services Block Grant The Free Society Laurence M. Vance Best Price: $13.55 Buy New $17.54 (as of 04:55 UTC - Details)
Training
Food Stamp Employment and Training Program
Foster Grandparents
Job Corps
Migrant Training
Native American Training
Senior Community Service Employment
Senior Companions
TANF Work Activities and Training
WIA Adult Employment and Training (formerly JTPA IIA Training for Disadvantaged Adults and Youth)
WIA Youth Opportunity Grants (formerly Summer Youth Employment
And these are just the means-tested programs!
If anyone should not have the right to vote, then certainly it should be those who benefit from these programs. What a tremendous conflict of interest to allow a person dependent on government funds to vote in an election that may have an impact on the continuance or the amount of those funds.
I am more concerned about welfare recipients voting than I am about someone who steals a car and then “serves his time” and “pays his debt to society” having his voting rights restored.
The Best of Laurence M. Vance


lewrockwell--2020-02-04--Failed Coup of a Failing Establishment

Failed Coup of a Failing Establishment

It has been a bad few days for the establishment , really bad .
In a 51-49 vote , the Senate refused to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump and agreed to end the trial Wednesday , with a near-certain majority vote to acquit the president of all charges .
As weekend polls show socialist Bernie Sanders surging into the lead for the nomination in the states of Iowa , New Hampshire and California , the sense of panic among Democratic Party elites is palpable .
Former Secretary of State and Joe Biden surrogate John Kerry was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking of the “ possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.
” Tuesday , Trump takes his nationally televised victory lap in the U.S. Capitol with his State of the Union address , as triumphant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and a humiliated Speaker Nancy Pelosi sit silently side-by-side behind him .
The Death of the West : ... Patrick J. Buchanan Check Amazon for Pricing .
Democrats may declare the Trump impeachment a victory for righteousness , but the anger and outrage , the moans and groans now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cable TV suggest the media know otherwise .
History , we are told , will vindicate what Pelosi and the Democrats did and stain forever the Republican Party for voting to acquit .
Perhaps , but only if some future Howard Zinn is writing the history .
Reality : The impeachment of Trump was an attempted — and failed — coup that not a single Republican supported , only Democrats in the House and their Senate caucus .
The impeachment of Trump was an exercise in pure partisanship and itself an abuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Democrats ’ case to remove Trump ?
Trump failed to invite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to the White House , and held up military aid to Kyiv for several months , to get Zelenskiy to hold a press conference to announce that Kyiv was looking into how Hunter Biden got on the board of a corrupt energy company at a retainer of $ 83,000 a month while his father was the chief international monitor of corruption in Ukraine .
The specific indictment : Trump ’ s suspension of military aid imperiled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arms to an “ ally ” who was fighting the Russians over there , so we don ’ t have to fight them over here .
And what was the outcome of it all ?
Zelenskiy got his meeting with the president .
He got the military aid in September .
He did not hold the press conference requested .
He did not announce an investigation of the Bidens .
After Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea and intervened to protect pro-Russian secessionists in the Donbass , Obama ’ s White House restricted U.S. lethal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and meals ready to eat .
What punishment did House and Senate Democrats and anti-Trump media demand for the pause in sending weapons for Ukraine ?
Democrats demanded that a Republican Senate overturn the election of 2016 , make Trump the first president ever impeached and removed , and then ensure that the American people could never vote for him again .
Nancy Pelosi ’ s House and the Democratic minority in the Senate were demanding that a Republican Senate do their dirty work and keep Trump off the ballot in 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Churchill , Hitler , and ... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price : $ 9.48 Buy New $ 14.00 For four years , elements of the liberal establishment — in the media , “ deep state ” and major institutions — have sought to destroy Trump .
First , they aimed to smear him and prevent his election , and then to overturn it as having been orchestrated by the Kremlin , and then to impeach and remove him , and then to block him from running again .
The damage they have inflicted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious .
U.S. intelligence agencies are being investigated by U.S. Attorney John Durham for their role in instigating an investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign .
The FBI has been discredited by exposure of a conspiracy of top-level agents to spy on Trump ’ s campaign .
The media , by endlessly echoing unproven claims that Trump was a stooge of the Kremlin , discredited themselves to a degree unknown since the “ Yellow Press ” prostituted itself to get us into war with Spain .
Media claims to be unbiased pursuers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s attacks , but from their own biased and bigoted coverage and commentary .
The NSC and State Department have been exposed as employing individuals with an exaggerated view of their role in the origination and the execution of foreign policy .
Disloyalty and animosity toward the chief executive appear to permeate the upper echelons of the “ deep state.
” Not in our lifetime have the institutions of government and the establishment been held in lower regard .
Almost all now concede we have become an us vs. them nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , giving our seemingly unbridgeable differences , remains a mystery .
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan

Shop all books by Pat Buchanan
It has been a bad few days for the establishment, really bad.
In a 51-49 vote, the Senate refused to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump and agreed to end the trial Wednesday, with a near-certain majority vote to acquit the president of all charges.
As weekend polls show socialist Bernie Sanders surging into the lead for the nomination in the states of Iowa, New Hampshire and California, the sense of panic among Democratic Party elites is palpable.
Former Secretary of State and Joe Biden surrogate John Kerry was overheard Sunday at a Des Moines hotel talking of the “possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.”
Tuesday, Trump takes his nationally televised victory lap in the U.S. Capitol with his State of the Union address, as triumphant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and a humiliated Speaker Nancy Pelosi sit silently side-by-side behind him.
Democrats may declare the Trump impeachment a victory for righteousness, but the anger and outrage, the moans and groans now coming off the editorial and op-ed pages and cable TV suggest the media know otherwise.
History, we are told, will vindicate what Pelosi and the Democrats did and stain forever the Republican Party for voting to acquit.
Perhaps, but only if some future Howard Zinn is writing the history.
Reality: The impeachment of Trump was an attempted — and failed — coup that not a single Republican supported, only Democrats in the House and their Senate caucus. The impeachment of Trump was an exercise in pure partisanship and itself an abuse of power.
What was the heart of the Democrats’ case to remove Trump?
Trump failed to invite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to the White House, and held up military aid to Kyiv for several months, to get Zelenskiy to hold a press conference to announce that Kyiv was looking into how Hunter Biden got on the board of a corrupt energy company at a retainer of $83,000 a month while his father was the chief international monitor of corruption in Ukraine.
The specific indictment: Trump’s suspension of military aid imperiled “our national security” by denying arms to an “ally” who was fighting the Russians over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here.
And what was the outcome of it all?
Zelenskiy got his meeting with the president. He got the military aid in September. He did not hold the press conference requested. He did not announce an investigation of the Bidens.
No harm, no foul.
How did President Obama handle Ukraine?
After Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea and intervened to protect pro-Russian secessionists in the Donbass, Obama’s White House restricted U.S. lethal military aid to Kyiv and provided blankets and meals ready to eat.
What punishment did House and Senate Democrats and anti-Trump media demand for the pause in sending weapons for Ukraine?
Capital punishment, a political death penalty.
Democrats demanded that a Republican Senate overturn the election of 2016, make Trump the first president ever impeached and removed, and then ensure that the American people could never vote for him again.
Nancy Pelosi’s House and the Democratic minority in the Senate were demanding that a Republican Senate do their dirty work and keep Trump off the ballot in 2020, lest he win a second term. Churchill, Hitler, and... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price: $9.48 Buy New $14.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
For four years, elements of the liberal establishment — in the media, “deep state” and major institutions — have sought to destroy Trump. First, they aimed to smear him and prevent his election, and then to overturn it as having been orchestrated by the Kremlin, and then to impeach and remove him, and then to block him from running again.
The damage they have inflicted upon our country’s institutions is serious.
U.S. intelligence agencies are being investigated by U.S. Attorney John Durham for their role in instigating an investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign. The FBI has been discredited by exposure of a conspiracy of top-level agents to spy on Trump’s campaign.
The media, by endlessly echoing unproven claims that Trump was a stooge of the Kremlin, discredited themselves to a degree unknown since the “Yellow Press” prostituted itself to get us into war with Spain. Media claims to be unbiased pursuers of truth have suffered, not only from Trump’s attacks, but from their own biased and bigoted coverage and commentary.
The NSC and State Department have been exposed as employing individuals with an exaggerated view of their role in the origination and the execution of foreign policy. Disloyalty and animosity toward the chief executive appear to permeate the upper echelons of the “deep state.”
Not in our lifetime have the institutions of government and the establishment been held in lower regard.
Almost all now concede we have become an us vs. them nation.
How we accomplish great things again, giving our seemingly unbridgeable differences, remains a mystery.
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan