One point worth highlighting right now is that, despite the push to impeach AND convict Trump, Hawley, and others, it’s unclear that it will happen — even unlikely.
These folks did push the invasion of the Capitol, and it’s more and more obvious that some of the invaders had rather sinister plans had they been able to grab Senators, Pence or Reps; the zip-ties make this rather clear.
They made US elites feel unsafe in a way that hasn’t been true since 9/11. US elites regularly kill, impoverish, and hurt millions of people, but for them to even be so much as scared is intolerable.
The problem is, this is colliding with another principle: The principle of elite immunity from consequences. Elites don’t really go after other elites. Trump, pre-Presidency had committed dozens of crimes, but was never prosecuted, because everything he had done, did others had done also.
Essentially, every senior Wall Street and banking executive is guilty of fraud in the lead up to the sub-prime crisis, and they were all let off with slaps on the wrist. George Bush was unquestionably a war criminal and so were many of his senior officials, and I’d argue the same is true of Obama.
Even Clinton’s “emails,” widely dismissed as “no big deal” is the sort of offense which, if done by someone junior, would — at best — end their career and would more likely lead to jail time.
US elites send other elites to jail very rarely, and political elites do this almost never.
So there’s a real bind here. On the one hand, some Republican elites put the rest of the US federal political class at risk. On the other hand, well, who wants to set a precedent that a US president, senator, or representative can be truly held to account? Impeaching is one thing, convicting another (which is why Biden is wishy-washy about impeaching and convicting Trump).
Who knows? After all, where it would end if elites started holding each other accountable, when they all know that almost every one of them has violated many laws and far more norms?
For elites, the law is a sword they use against their lessers, not a weapon intended to be used against them. It is a shield against the hoi-polloi and has nothing to do with justice or equality before the law.
Feel for them, in their terrible dilemma: What is more important? Their physical safety or their legal immunity?
All the content here is free, but subscriptions and donations do help, a lot.
Mark Pontin
I’ve been wondering about this myself.
One option for U.S. elites is to let Trump be taken out by the Iranians, who promised a reprisal for Trump’s assassination of General Qasem Soleimani. Obviously, if the Iranians aren’t sufficiently obliging, a false flag operation will do as well. Either way, the hit can be branded as a monstrous act of aggression and terrorism by Tehran, providing the pretext for ramping up spending on intel-military operations against the Iranians.
That said, the above may be beyond current elites’ competence, though.
Back in the empire’s heyday, yes — whichever factions among TPTB were responsible for the trifecta of JFK, RFK, and MLK (“Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action, Mr. Bond.”) could carry out such an operation competently. Today’s U.S. elites, conversely, are the product of forty years of neoliberalism and, to be reductive, only know how to loot.
So, my _guess_ is that the likeliest scenario is that too many people, including elites, now have their knickers twisted about Trump and therefore there’ll be a drift — even savage momentum — towards vengeance on him. This will then spin out of control in directions the elites were too incompetent to anticipate, the situation will further escalate, and people will be rioting in the streets by the summer. (That latter, of course, is a given whatever happens.)
KT Chong
Here is a case study: Bernie Madoff.
Who himself was an “elite”… until he was discovered to have been screwing over other elites, who were many more and had more power than he did.
Donald Trump has screwed over too many elites, and he will lose all of his power in about two weeks. Trump is a “top elite” for now, only because he is the President for the moment. In two weeks, he won’t be, and he will lose almost all of his powers, (which is why he is so desperate to try to stay in power.) His last stupid coup attempt has made enemies of too many elites who are not forgiving.
Elites can get away with screwing over peasants like us, but NOT with screwing over so many other elites and elites who have more power.
KT Chong
Trump will be made an example of; and in this rarest of case, my interest and those of the elites are align. Trump must be the biggest moron who is stupid enough to make enemies of so many elites and so many peasants, all of whom now want to see his head on a pike.
The elites in the Big Tech have already pulled out their knives. IMO that is the sign of what is to come in a few weeks. The other elites are just plotting, waiting, moving all the pieces…
Which means, Trump will become even more desperate.
Astrid
I don’t think this is a problem for the elites. They can punish Trump once he’s out of their club. He’s always been the Zaphod Beeblebrox to draw out the attention of the masses, while the conspiracy of Vogons and galactic brain care specialists profitably evaporate star systems in his shadow.
Look at what they’re doing to Assange, while we’re distracted by Trump’s man cave putsch.
Ché Pasa
Welp, Nancy is officially delaying any action by the House to remove Trump — as seemed likely last week. Despite all the puffed up bluster, the House under Nancy’s gavel will continue to rely on process, regular order, and a demand (again) that Pence invoke the 25th. If he doesn’t then, well… certainly… something, something… removal, somehow. Someday. Maybe. Really!
Word was circulating by Friday that a “silent 25th” had already been invoked, and Trump was essentially stripped of nearly all authority and power and was isolated in the White House, while Pence was effectively in charge of the government. (Gee, I’m so old, I remember was “Pence in Charge” was the greatest fear being promoted if Trump was removed through impeachment.)
By the weekend, it wasn’t at all clear that Pence was in charge of anything. But then was Trump? Javanka? Who was? Anyone? Everything seemed to stop while blame-shifting went into overdrive. Arrests of high profile insurrectionists were publicized widely, but none of them were particularly key to what had happened. Their scalps on the wall will matter not at all.
The stalling and the ineffectiveness of the response to the Capitol dustup is correctly attributed by Ian to a dispute among the ruling class over their own culpability/impunity. Their self-interest overrides anything else.
If Trump is really sidelined, as seems to be the case, what should happen to him over the next several weeks can be dangled before the masses as one of many distractions from what’s really going on behind the scenes.
What that is I don’t know.
Stirling S Newberry
It becomes a political weapon. This is the worst result possible.
Stormcrow
No, Stirling.
The worst result possible result would have been Trump winning his coup attempt.
Chicago Clubs
The most half-assed “coup” attempt in history. This wasn’t a coup in any real sense of the word, BUT it definitely exposed that the police at least are ready for a real coup to take place. I think Trump is done and there’s no one waiting in the wings to take over, but in ten or even five years’ time, who knows, a real coup might be in the offing.
metamars
Oh Ian, Ian, Ian. I think you, we, all of us have been duped.
Bernie Kerik was interviewed about this on War Room Pandemic, and he said he would have had about 10x (IIRC) as many cops present as actually were. This was as setup, as phony as the Russiagate nonsense.
Although I’m less sure about the assassination of Babbitt, who her brother SAYS would have been happy to die for Trump, it’s looking more and more suspicious.
Some more thoughts about the video of the shooting of Babbitt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ9oThRuMVs&ab_channel=NationalFile
It seemed to me that Babbitt’s getting thrown backwards as a result of getting shot was consistent with her being ‘really’ shot, with a real bullet, as the only other means I can imagine is some sort of magnetic attraction, which seems extremely implausible. EXCEPT for the fact that there SEEMS to be (well, it’s a bad angle for this) no rotation about any lever point, or points. It’s almost like one of those fake Hollywood explosions, where people are thrown backwards, but with little rotation. (They get catapulted off of some spring platform, I believe.)
Certainly, if a boxer gets punched in the head, his head is displaced relative to the vertebrae in the neck. His head is “snapped” back, or to the side.
I went online to look for video of real punches to the neck, and didn’t find any boxer type video (there was some WWE, but the fighters are sort of locked up.)
The most relevant thing I found was this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXxx9YRtLLg&ab_channel=kazmirhansford
It’s from a game program, but the physics are realistic, AFAICT. A fighter gets kicked in the neck, from the side, at about 5 seconds into the video. You need to slow the video down to get a good look.
As a result of the blow, the head is still “snapped”. Furthermore the upper torso had significant displacement about a lever point about waist high.
What DOESN’T happen is the the guy who gets kicked somehow had the momentum transfer more or less evenly throughout his body, hence his whole body get translated to the side, more or less in the same alignment of body parts.
Now, recall that in a previous post, I noted that the gun appears pointed chest height to somebody standing on the ground, but Babbit appears to be about 1 1/2 foot in the air. So, at least eyeballing it, it appears the bullet should have struck her in the stomach.
A bullet strike to the stomach would result in minimizing any rotation about the waist, as was observed (well, as best as I could make it out). However, if such bullets normally go through a person, there will be that much less momentum to transfer to the person, from the bullet. And I believe this will almost always be the case, as can be inferred from “EXPERIMENT! GUN VS WATERMELON (9MM)” on youtube. Not only does a 9mm easily go through a watermelon; it also goes through both sides of a metallic shaving cream can.
So, my hypothesis is that, if the shooting was a fake, then Babbit was wearing a bullet proof vest, and was shot in the stomach. The vest would allow for 1) capture of all of the bullet’s momentum and 2) even distribution of the absorbed momentum, to allow for the translational (backwards) motion observed. Of course, a vest also explains why there was no sign of a bullet that exits the body.
==============
A side note: IIRC, I saw a video of somebody claiming that he was present at the Babbit shooting, and that people were trying to pull her back away from the window. That is obviously false, based on the video. If this is a fake, I’m willing to bet that basically ALL the people that were near the barricade were confederates. Or, at least the people near Babbitt. Because you don’t want any do gooders attempting CPR, only to find out that your subject is wearing a bullet proof vest, as you try and depress her chest cavity, e.g.
Where is the autopsy? Have the eye witnesses been interrogated? Do we know their names, at least, so that we can talk to them, ourselves? Maybe the SWAT team was too tired from their 28 second “good job” (see below) to get eye witness testimony?
=============
A second side note: The SWAT type guys are told “Good Job Guys” 36 seconds into the video. They’ve only reached the top of the stairs at about 8 seconds into the video. So, their “good job” lasted all of 28 seconds; and from what I can observe, they do nothing significant to alleviate the situation. Ya know, like tell the rioters to “step back from the (barricaded) door, or you will be arrested!”. They’re in a narrow passageway, so the ratio of cops to rioters is very high (say 1:1.5; not 1:5,000+ as it was by the outside gates). So, what the hell are they doing there, if not to tamp down the riot? Which they could have easily done, in this particular location, at this particular time.
=============
A third side note: At :26 into the video, the official-looking plainclothes guy (with suit and tie) moves sideways to let the two cops behind him proceed down the stairs. However, he is also looking down the stairs (then to the side). It sure seems like he KNOWS that the 2 cops closer to the door, that are behind him, are going to proceed down the stairs.
IOW, it looks like a pre-planned, rehearsed scenario. The suit and tie guy might have screwed up, by turning his back to the door. It would have been more realistic if he had stayed looking at the door, and the two cops closer said to him “excuse us, Mr. plainclothes guys. Our 26 seconds of fame are up, and we have to get out of the scene. Would you please move to the side so we can get on with our script?” /s
Bill H
In 2009 Barack Obama said this when asked about prosecuting George W Bush for war crimes,
The shorter version was, “We should look forward, not backward.” The real reason is that in a nation such as ours no incoming administration will prosecute an outgoing administration because they know that in four (or eight) years they will be the outgoing ones, subject to prosecution by the new incoming ones.
The New Democrats are so blinded by their hatred of Trump and so crazed by their desire for revenge that they cannot look forward to the day that they will be subject to the mercy of a new, incoming administration.
GlassHammer
One of the most irksome aspects of our discussion of current events is how we just ignore that A.) People are moved by fantasy more than material interest, B.) That fantasy comes from consuming propoganda, C.) Our Elites craft the propaganda to displace material interest/reality, D.) Nearly all Politics we consume in the U.S. is propaganda, and E.) This propaganda has successfully severed any connection between material reality of people and their ability to use their democracy.
I get that we want to see an Elite vs. Elite show trial but what Trump really did was amplify propaganda that had been in circulation for 40+ years.
Ray Saunders
The Lincoln Project, run by rightwingers got a lot of good press from the left by attacking Trump effectively. IMO they did so because they realized Trump would destroy the GOP. They were not saving Democracy – they were protecting their political futures. The elite hater Trump because he is endangering them.
Thomas Golladay
Ian, Trump did not incite this in any way, shape, or form. He was still speaking when the assault began. In no way did he say storm the capital, he called for a peaceful protest. In fact he moved to restore order quickly.
The video of cops opening barricades happened well after the building was breached. These protestors as far as they knew were being allowed in and for the most part were sight seeing, even staying in the ropes.
You’re jumping the gun too quickly on the timelines of events.
Stirling S Newberry
“This is one of those incidents that grows worse.”
Really, I’m shocked.
The coup wasn’t in the cards.
Feral Finster
The criminal laws in the United States are far-reaching and broad enough in scope that an aggressive prosecutor can always find a entirely lawful pretext to bring charges against anyone.
That goes double for a target engaged in higher level business or politics.
This is entirely intentional.
Willy
Trumps current lawyer called for the execution of Pence. Trumps previous lawyer calls him a psychopath. Par for the course. Trump is at best, a stupid elite, and at worst, an elite gone rogue.
If I understand that world at all, it’s all about a “food chain” mentality with alliances and appeasements constantly shifting depending on perceived status. That “inferiors are irrelevant” is something most of us learned back in high school. Human nature. Trump did get his fellow elites a huge tax cut. It’ll be interesting to see how Trumps fellow elites will ultimately classify and manage him.
anon
None of this matters to me as the thousands of people who continue to die each day because of COVID-19, and yet, this story is still on the front page of every news network. Even the mere threat of violence against elites takes precedent over 350k dead Americans. As I said several days ago, had thousands of Americans sieged the Capitol for valid reasons (lack of health care, 350k COVID-19 deaths, no stimulus checks, high unemployment and homelessness) the violence and anger would have been justifiable. Instead, these idiots only got up off their coaches for the dumbest reason imaginable.
Cold & Hungry
Mr Golladay I would like you to meet GlassHammer. He has already introduced everyone to your brothers Fantasy & Propaganda.
Hugh
Feral Finster, if prosecutors actually pursued the rich and powerful for their crimes, Trump would have spent most of his life in jail. We have a system where there is no accountability. I would like to see some. I would like to see the rich and powerful have to consider the consequences of their actions.
If Thomas Golladay is any indication, the Trumper line at this point is for us to disbelieve our lying eyes. The police removing barricades to let in the sightseers was worth a good laugh though.
Mark Pontin
Stirling N: “It becomes a political weapon. This is the worst result possible.”
With respect, come on. There’s no worldline where that does not happen.
Stirling S Newberry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3quruHpcuo
“Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.”
edmondo
I see that AOC had no time to ask for a vote on M4A but signed onto the impeachment farce ASAP. Lesson learned: Next time vote for Joe Crowley.
NR
It’s especially hilarious to hear Thomas and other right-wingers using the “they were mostly just peaceful protesters!” excuse after having spent the entire summer of 2020 demonizing everyone involved with the BLM protests. Hypocrisy is a virtue for the modern American right.
S Brennan
Ian…Brother,
I don’t know where you are getting your news, hopefully not the same 3-letter agency that provides Stirling with his but, this post is utter nonsense. The people who damaged property didn’t get their (orders from Trump)* and are far less “sinister” than those who burned down Federal Buildings this past summer to your polite applause. These protesters will be prosecuted to the very limit of the law. Whereas those who wore black balaclavas did far damage and truly meant to kill people and they got off scott-free…again to your polite applause. Indeed the most “outraged” here and now were the most sanguine then.
Meanwhile the silencing of opponents of the Clinton/Bush/Obama regime is ongoing…an iron curtain is descending…as I said before, it ain’t a man on horseback that ends this show, but an internal cabal that will birth our Stalin.
I can hardly wait for commenters reply arguments, 1] ad hominem 2] straw-man 3] false equivalency. Fortunately the neoDs [and their R allies] got everything they wanted so many of the neoD’d DNCer commenters will start leaving this site until the next election cycle.
* [as big lies go, it’s a little shy of the Gleiwitz incident but will get us to the same place]
Hugh
“a spokesman for the president and many GOP lawmakers have said that the push for impeachment with just days left in Mr. Trump’s presidency would divide the country.”
This from the WSJ. Trump was busy dividing the country for four years. It’s why he lost the election. But so much of this reads like dark comedy. Only now at long, long last when it comes back on them are they concerned.
edmondo
A show trial. We are all Stalinists now!
js
Sure to divide the country more than an attempted coup. If it’s not dark comedy that is surely gallows humor.
Mark Level
To answer Ian’s closing query, “What is more important? Their physical safety or their legal immunity?”
“Their legal immunity” will be the answer, I’d certainly bet heavily on that.
KT Chong makes an interesting point viz Bernie Madoff, but– Elites can also scam their fellows and get basic impunity for years and years . . . Elizabeth Holmes with the Theranos scam ripped off the likes of George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, James Mattis and Betsy DeVos and had to pay back some of the remaining stolen billion$ but is still walking around free and clear, even got married in 2019 years after her exposure . . .
The Obama “Look forward and not back” is also quoted– Torture’s all good, they were only Muslims after all, John Yoo, who designed the torture policies that reportedly led to over 100 homicides as recognized even by the US military is today an “academic” at “liberal” UC Berkeley.
In other related news, Joe “I Beat the Socialist” Biden is appointing Cheney’s top foreign policy adviser when the Iraq War Crimes started, Victoria Nuland, to a high foreign policy post. She is married into the Kaplan NeoCon crime family who were major promoters/ propagandists for the nonexistent “WMDs” & Iraq war. But let’s “move on” and forget . . .
I could quote George Carlin regarding their club, but let’s reference Frank Zappa instead, “Coz what they do in Washington/ They just look out for number One”/ And Number One ain’t you/ You aren’t even number two”.
Some Dems will recommend ousting the R’s who provoked the insurrections that threatened their lives as a sort of performative theater. The (R)s will protest that they’re really wonderful people and didn’t mean ill. The Dems will back down and retreat like they always do (playing the Washington Senators to the R’s more competent, ruthless and somehow undefeated “Harlem (I know, kind of ironic) Globetrotters.”
Nothing to see here, folks, there will be more “Bangs” from the R’s followed by more performative “whimpers” from their Lesser Evil Dem “colleagues.” As Joe Biden was kind enough to remind his donors, “Nothing will fundamentally change.” In a series of bangs and whimpers, the US will resemble the late Roman period, local warlords taking over during insurrectionary periods, failed schools, failed roads and infrastructure, etc. The Byzantines in the East prospered, Empire moves elsewhere, Canada may have a marginally livable society, even Mexico may get its act together a few decades after the US can no longer poison and control its leadership, but the US is like Biden’s (& Trump’s) brain. It’s cottage cheese, it’s toast.
someofparts
From Fault Line, by Barry Eisler –
“Americans thought of themselves as a benevolent, peace-loving people. But benevolent, peace-loving peoples don’t cross oceans to new continents, exterminate the natives, expel the other foreign powers, conquer sovereign territory, win world wars, and less than two centuries after their birth stand astride the planet … It was the combination of the gentle self-image and the brutal truth that made Americans so dangerous. Because if you aggressed against such a people, who could see themselves only as innocent… they would react not just with anger, but with Old Testament-style moral wrath. Anyone depraved enough to attack such angels forfeited claims to adjudication, proportionality, even elemental mercy itself.”
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/12/the-politics-of-thrillers
edmondo
Since it’s Nancy’s obsession to impeach ex-presidents, when can we expect her to go after W? He killed more people than Trump and stomped on more Amedments to the Constitution than Trump ever did.
NL
Life is getting interesting.
So, who here thinks that ‘democratism’ can be just as motivating as ‘nationalism’?
“Nationalism, ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.” From Britannica.
Democratism , ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to democracy surpass other individual or group interests.
Hugh
The developing Trumper line is that nothing happened on Wednesday, nothing, and besides brown people like BLM and Obama by definition are worse. But no, no they’re not racist.
Michael Ismoe
I guess it shows how petty and vindictive The Gellato Queen is. I guess it’s best that Trump pardon himself after all
Z
And the organization that backstops the inequality in our society, that supports our rulers’ stock portfolios, that shields our rulers from any reckoning within their ranks and from the economic realities of the working class and poor … THE FEDERAL RESERVE … just keeps whirring away sending money to our masters, buying their real estate securities and other bonds to keep our rulers completely safe and protected from the upcoming implosion of the debt bubble caused by so many of the working class and poor being unable to make payments because they’ve been walking a tightrope and no longer have jobs, as well as blissfully inflating the stock market to record highs while we are in the middle of a raging pandemic and tens of millions of people are experiencing economic calamity. Talk about a lack of accountability …
Well, at least Larry Summers can rest a little easier now that his concerns have been assuaged, for now, about citizens getting an extra $1400 and overheating the economy.
Z
NL
Who will be the führer (a false reactionary tyrant) of democratism?
Note, “Angela Merkel finds Twitter’s decision to ban President Donald Trump’s account “problematic”. Germans know what they are talking about.
In any event, our love and devotion to ‘democracy’ will be grow in proportion to our increasing poverty, backwardness and ignorance.
NL
Z
The FED is not a problem, it does what it has been established to do. The legislature is the problem. The legislature established a monetary system in which the public/government can NOT create credit and fund the projects that it wants to fund (because to get money the government has to either tax the people or issue debt, which is bought mostly by private banks; this banks then can exchange the debt for money by selling it to the FED — in other words, the private banks determine whether the government get any money and at what interest rate).
The legislature could change the monetary system and/or establish a parallel credit issuing banking authority as had been done under FDR. A bill to this effect has been was recently filed (HR 6422, The National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2020) but do not expect it to make it far.
NL
The legislature could also increase taxes on those who can afford to pay higher taxes but that would mean taxing themselves more — not gonna happen.
China, in contrast, is moving in the direction ‘money is a utility’ delivered via ‘digital currency’. Our money are too expensive and body politics does not control it, we will be left behind.
On the ‘positive’ side, the Chinese allowed the Wall Street in… best case scenario, it will do a number on them like what it did on us…
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-04/wall-street-steps-up-hiring-in-china-with-analysts-in-demand
Dale
This debate in Washington seems, to me, to be even more cover your ass pronouncements from our politicians. If Trump truly instigated an insurrection against the government of the United States let the DOJ collect evidence proving such a charge. They can then prosecute him once the new president is in office. I suggest the trial be broadcast via the media. Similar to the Eichmann trial in Israel in the 50’s. What are the chances of that actually happening?
Plague Species
Where have I been?
Plague Species
Spot on, Dale. This is what I’ve been saying.
Hey Biden and the Dems, let’s poll everyone who voted for you this past election and see what they want done about McDonald Trump.
Here are the choices.
1.) Do nothing.
2.) Impeach him even if that impeachment process transcends administrations and doesn’t culminate until Biden has taken office if it succeeds.
3.) Don’t impeach him and instead have Merrick Garland investigate him and indict him for his bevy of crimes while in office.
Keep in mind, a felon cannot hold office just as an impeached president cannot hold office. With number three above you get two birds with one stone. Trump goes to jail for the rest of his days and he can never hold office again. With number two, which is aptly number two considering number two is crap, he can never hold office again but he walks free even though he is a mass-murdering criminal psychopath, and no that’s not hyperbole, it’s straight up fact.
I’m betting if presented this way in the poll, meaning truthfully, the overwhelming majority will emphatically choose number three and yet we know the Dems will not consider it and instead use number two when it’s number one they really intend knowing full well number two is not possible.
NL
Actually, I should have written ‘the Chinese freed the Wall Street in China’. The Wall Street has been in China for a long time, but it had been restricted (eg, had to form partnerships). It got more freedom to go alone, extract more money and benefit from the Chinese 3% interest rate on the government debt. I guess may be the CPC believes that it could stop the Wall Street before the latter could wrack the country, like what they did with Jack Ma and Ant, and that perhaps the bargain is worth it at this point in the US-China relationship, as the CPC expects that the Wall Street will act in the interest of China.
GlassHammer
“But so much of this reads like dark comedy” – Hugh
Watch as the narrative for holding people accountable goes:
This is bad for the country (my peers) -> This is bad for Biden’s agenda (the symbol of my enemies) -> This is bad for the leaders of America (the people who support the symbol of my enemies) -> This is bad for the Left/ANTIFA/BLM (the people behind the people who support the symbol of my enemy)
Just walking propoganda back by using….. more and more propoganda.
GlassHammer
I swear in a few hours I am going to see a post here saying “Trump didn’t incite insurrection live on television, it was actually a disgruntled staffer that happened to look just like him.”
Ché Pasa
Nancy sincerely believes that if she pushes the Process Button hard enough, the desired results will emerge from the aether. Much like voters believe that if they only push the Election Button hard enough, they’ll get the Saviour they want.
This is nonsense of course, but in LaLa Land, if you only believe hard enough you can have anything.
Much like:
Hugh
Except for some pilot programs which never included DC, cameras in Federal courts have been banned under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53 since 1946. As per the uscourts.gov site,
“Rule 53 states: ‘[e]xcept as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules, the court must not permit the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom.’ ”
The problem with the Fed is that it is unConstutional, violating Article I Section 8: “The Congress shall have Power … To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof.”
Money creation is instead effectively controlled by private banks through the regional Feds. For the last 40 years, it has used interest rates to suppress worker wages. And since 2008 it has repeatedly bailed out Wall Street and kept markets juiced so that even now in what should be a depression, the Dow is at 31,000.
There is no Constitutional prohibition on a President being a past felon: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” (Art. II, Section 1.)
Z
NL,
Federal Reserve’s mandate:
The monetary policy goals of the Federal Reserve are to foster economic conditions that achieve both stable prices and maximum sustainable employment.
The Fed has a very nebulous mandate. For instance, I haven’t specifically read anywhere that feeding liquidity into the stock market to drive it to record highs while the rest of the economy is in a recession is part of their mandate. It is arguably within their power to create money and give us all Federal Reserve bank accounts to give citizens money, but you don’t see the Fed’s creativity going in that direction. They could also be helping out state and local governments much more but they have chosen not to. They do possess agency.
Just because the Federal Reserve was given birth by another entity doesn’t mean it has no responsibility for what it does. The Federal Reserve is all grown up now, it’s over a 100 years old, and it has become a wrecking ball to our society. That’s on them.
Z
Mark Level
As to Z’s & NL’s take on the Fed, I really got a good belly laugh when I saw this Politico piece on the $7.2 million Janet Yellen got from CitiGroup, GoldSachs and all the usual suspects in “speaking fees.”
Link at https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/01/yellen-made-millions-in-wall-street-speeches-453223. My laugh at the closing line viz Yellen’s “high ethical standards and tough enforcement”.
Some Dem “progressives” might (?) ask hard questions about this, but since the Force the Vote on M4A movement showed that AOC and “the Squad” are all theater, they won’t even oppose Pelosi in her dotage and try to expand health care during a pandemic that’s killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and is unabated, well. . . . The handouts to the looters will continue at Treasury and the Fed, some policies are bipartisan, and the donor class must be served.
I’m glad that some of the Koch-allied businesses might stop shoveling $$$ to the Hawley & Cruz types (until things died down), but as Joe promises, “Nothing will fundamentally change.”
Z
Hey NL,
You think the innocent Federal Reserve may have went to sleep on some of these below?
From the Federal Reserve’s website: https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/pf.htm
Purposes & Functions:
4. Promoting Financial System Stability
5. Supervising and Regulating Financial Institutions and Activities
7. Promoting Consumer Protection and Community Development
You think they’ve done a good job promoting financial system stability? What is this our fifth or sixth financial crisis in the last 30 years? Did you know Greenspan helped shut down a move to limit derivatives, called for the repeal of Glass-Steagall, refused to tighten down credit when he was warned about the housing bubble, etc.? Do you think the Federal Reserve has no fault for the criminality entrenched into our financial system that robs citizens by design? Is that “promoting consumer protection and community development”? You think they’ve done a good job “supervising and regulating financial institutions and activities”?
I suspect that all you know about the Federal Reserve is what you’ve been fed and you swallowed it all without a thought.
Z
Hugh
Sorry, Plague Species, I misread your comment on felons. Art. I Section 3 has this to say about conviction following impeachment:
“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”
I have not seen this discussed, but it would seem that Trump could not pardon himself for crimes arising out of insurrection if he is impeached and convicted of insurrection. I fully expect Trump to pardon himself and his family on Jan. 19 for everything else.
Hugh
What was so mind-blowing about Greenspan was his faith that markets didn’t need to be regulated and would self-regulate on their own at the same time he engineered the Greenspan put to bail them out. Bernanke largely followed this thinking even after the housing market went south in 2007 and into 2008 that only specific individual interventions, like Bear Stearns, would be required.
NL
Z,
Blaming the FED for their monetary policy is like blaming the IRS for tax collection.
The FED is a creature of the legislature — “The Federal Reserve Act was passed by the 63rd United States Congress and signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson on December 23, 1913. The law created the Federal Reserve System, the central banking system of the United States. …
The U.S. Congress established three key objectives for monetary policy in the Federal Reserve Act: —>maximizing employment, stabilizing prices, and moderating long-term interest rates.<–" (Wiki)
Unemployment before the pandemic was historically low, interests rates were historically low (and still are), inflation is a more debatable topic, but 2 our 3 is not that bad. What are you not happy about?
The Congress can do away with the FED in a single sweep and at the same time establish a public bank for credit and money issuance. Or better yet, the Congress could nationalize the FED (it is now a public-private partnership). Or it could legislate the FED buy US debt directly or funds companies directly. But the Congress does not trust itself and the people with money and credit creation and believes that private super wealthy elite bankers will do a better job controlling money and credit creation as well as the capital allocation. Is this the FEDs fault? Let's be reasonable — the answer is no.
Screaming about how irresponsible and dangerous FED is, only diverts the attention from the true culprit — the US Congress.
And the reason the FED buys all that debt now is because of the pandemic — and who messed up the pandemic response? And the dollar is going down vis-a-vis yuan because China and several other Asian countries handled the pandemic better, still growing and pay 3% on the government bonds.
NL
I replied to Z. It awaits moderation. The point being blaming the FED for their monetary policy is like blaming the IRS for tax collection.
The culprit is the Congress, it created the FED and the money and credit creation system that does not trust the public and puts these functions into the hands of private super wealthy elite bankers. The mandates are also from the Congress. The FED has done what it has been created to do. Too bad you and the public do not like it, guess your ‘representatives’ do not represent you and you have no power to change things.
Mark Pontin
NL wrote: “…the CPC believes that it could stop the Wall Street before the latter could wrack the country … and perhaps the bargain is worth it at this point in the US-China relationship, as the CPC expects that the Wall Street will act in the interest of China.”
The CPC is correct on both accounts.
Feral Finster
@Hugh: Read carefully what I wrote. I said that an aggressive prosecutor *could* find a pretext to bring charges against Trump (or anyone else). I did not say that they had done so.
Fact is, enough judges or lawyers out there with enough hours in the day, to bring charges against every instance of elite wrongdoing.
Feral Finster
Sorry, last paragraph should have read “there are not enough judges or lawyers…..”
Michael Ismoe
LOL.
Yves is re-opening comments on her website tomorrow and all you have to do to comment is to agree with everything they post. AND – NEVER, EVER, say anything bad about Bernie Sanders because he took a dive to help you get M4A. Sure he did.
Plague Species
Sorry, Hugh, I should have been more clear. More specifically, a convicted, incarcerated felon cannot be president, or not practically at least. I’ll take impeachment and prosecution for all his many crimes to include inciting an insurrection for $1,000, Alex. The best of both and all worlds.
Z
NL,
No, the point being is that the Fed using its monetary policy powers to largely benefit the rich is like the IRS using it tax collection audit powers to focus primarily on the poor and working class rather than the rich.
Z
NL
Z,
Is it the FED’s fault that most people do not own stocks? Anyone who owns stocks is making a killing. It is not a FED’s job to run homeless shelters and soup kitchens.
And who is supposed to oversee those things and make things right? The people’s representatives!!!!! – right? And if the people’s representatives do anything about it, stop complaining and sounding like a permabear. Get yourself a robinhood account and start trading, get yourself some of that free money.
Z
NL,
The Federal Reserve and IRS both have agency and they have made a choice to act as they do. How they came about is irrelevant. You could blame Congress for damn near everything in the country by your misleading line of bs.
NL’s Origin of Guilt Theory …
Your honor, this man is innocent of the 28 murders he committed, which I do admit he did commit, because it was his parents who created him, you see, which was outside of his agency. He simply wouldn’t be here today to commit these murders if his parents hadn’t made him and now it so happens that his parents are too deranged and corrupt to control him. Oh well, the only fair thing to do now is to let this man loose on the public since the true origination of the crime, the essential preconditions, were not in fact committed by him.
Z
Hugh
The Fed has been suppressing wages for 40 years through its interest rate policies. So no, people don’t have discretionary income to buy stocks. After 2008, the Fed’s emergency programs alone cycled more than $27 trillion through them to help prop up banks and stock markets, i.e. the rich. No one knows how much went through and still goes through their regular operations. Then there were its successive multi-trillion dollar rounds of QE. The latest of these began in late 2019 before the virus and still continues. And again almost all of the Fed’s money creation occurs through its regional Feds which are in turn dominated by private banks.
js
With NC half the time it’s NEVER EVER say anything bad about Trump. How did their soft support for and excellent judgement on the implications of Trumpism work out?
Their links may be interesting and often good, their political judgement is often just terrible. Since Trump is a done deal maybe they are done apologizing, or maybe they want to push Josh Hawley now.
NL
Hey Z,
No, no – The Congress is the Fed’s prosecutor, judge and jury. The Congress has the power over the FED because it made it and can unmake it. The Congress also created the monetary system and it can unmake it. The FED has no obligation to listen to you and the public – have you heard about the FED independence? Who do you think it is independent of first and foremost?
I suppose you can beat down on the FED in hopes that the Congress hears and does something. But let’s not be delusional about how the present has come be and why it is persists.
You seem to be misunderstanding my point. But that’s a Ok.
NL
Z,
And yes, the buck does stop with the Congress and the President. Harry Truman was right.
Hugh
The Fed is not independent. It is effectively run by private banks. Why do you think the Fed bailed out the banking system in 2008 without even trying to reform the banks? Maximizing employment is a joke goal. The Fed hasn’t taken it seriously anytime in the last 40 years. Keeping the rich rich is not one of its missions but it is the only one it goes all out to do.
NL
Final comment on this.
You know, we should be really talking about this awesome bill that presents a way to fund infrastructure spending: HR 6422, The National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2020
And instead we focus on trashing the FED for things that are not really its fault. And that is the problem in the present discourse!
Hugh
I would say it is easy to comment at NC. Never criticize MMT, Russia, or Trump. Never praise Democrats. It’s OK to say nice things about Bernie and maybe even AOC.
NL
Hugh
The Fed is not independent. It is effectively run by private banks.
I know — please see the part uptop where I talk about the FED being a private-public partnership and about FED nationalization. The FED is independent of the people, its purpose from the beginning has been to serve the private banking system. In the US, money and credit creation and allocation are done 100% by the banks, all which are private. The US does not have a state/public bank! The public has no input on the monetary policy. This was legislated by the Congress because the people’s representatives believe that the public can not be entrusted with money and credit creation and allocation.
Hugh
From an October 23, 2009 article at HuffPo: Priceless: How The Federal Reserve Bought The Economics Profession
“The Federal Reserve, through its extensive network of consultants, visiting scholars, alumni and staff economists, so thoroughly dominates the field of economics that real criticism of the central bank has become a career liability for members of the profession, an investigation by the Huffington Post has found.”
Yeah, so really the Fed is just an innocent bystander. Nothing to see here, move along.
Z
NL,
Yes, it was a slightly off-target analogy, but the core of your argument is that the Federal Reserve is absolved of all responsibilities for its actions because it did not create itself. I have pointed out to you responsibilities that it has not lived up to, for example in regards to regulating the banks, but you have ignored those and keep going back to its money cannon like that’s the only tool they have to bring our markets and economy into some balance where it serves the best interests of the country as a whole and not just the people who own the vast majority of the stocks.
I know, and understand, that Congress created the Fed and has the power to abolish the Fed, but that doesn’t absolve the Fed of its actions. I also wish that Congress would abolish the Fed.
I beat down on the Fed partly so more people understand their culpability for our imbalanced, winner-take-all economy in the hopes that maybe more people rise up and eventually do something about it. IMO, there ought to be massive demonstrations outside of the Federal Reserve banks with demands that the Federal Reserve use its powers to help the vast majority of the public more. I have no hope of any legislation being passed to abolish the Fed through the gauntlet of multimillionaires in the Congress without severe public pressure since it’s also their portfolios and wealth that are being backstopped.
Z
Hugh
I agree NL. The Fed is not about us.
Z
NL,
And yet …
Federal Reserve’s mandate:
The monetary policy goals of the Federal Reserve are to foster economic conditions that achieve both stable prices and maximum sustainable employment.
From the Federal Reserve’s website: https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/pf.htm
Purposes & Functions:
4. Promoting Financial System Stability
5. Supervising and Regulating Financial Institutions and Activities
7. Promoting Consumer Protection and Community Development
Z
Z
Mallam (NL),
Arguing with you about the Federal Reserve is like debating a law student who is on Modafinil. So sure and smug that they possess some higher, profound knowledge … the Fed was created by Congress and can be abolished by Congress (NO SHIT!) … and constantly parrying larger points about the Fed’s agency in their absolute failure to live up to their responsibilities THAT EVEN THE FED ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THEY HAVE.
Yes, we get it! We know that the Federal Reserve was created by Congress and can be abolished by Congress! Do you have anything else to say about it?
Z
NL
Z,
I am not absolving the FED of anything, but I do not want to dump on it more than its ‘fair’ share. I also do not think that if we abolished the FED, the inequality will stop growing and the income and wealth justice will be restored. The situation may actually become worse. The FED is merely a regulator (together with OCC, CFTC, SEC, etc) in a massive and opaque monetary system in which a handful of elite banks create credit/money and determine which kind of productive activity will be pursued (by making loans).
The purpose of the FED is to save the private banking system from itself, from its inherent problems and deficiencies.
Even the stock share price increases is just a consequence of the FED saving the banks and not the companies. The banks have made loans to the companies. Without FED’s support for the corporate America (in the form of low interest credit and share price rises), many corporations would go bankrupt taking the banks with them.
Z – “IMO, there ought to be massive demonstrations outside of the Federal Reserve banks with demands that the Federal Reserve use its powers to help the vast majority of the public more.”
The FED is a banker’s bank – by law, it can not send money directly to the people, and it can not make loans either, it can only buy existing corporate or federal debt from the elite banks. Only the elite banks can make loans through money creation! Furthermore, it answers to the elite banks that comprise its ‘membership’. It has its own heavily armed police force (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Police). IMO, protesting in front of the FED banks is pointless.
Z – “I have no hope of any legislation being passed to abolish the Fed through the gauntlet of multimillionaires in the Congress without severe public pressure since it’s also their portfolios and wealth that are being backstopped.”
Ah, you have a bigger problem here than the fed. Protesting in front of the FED will not solve it.
NL
Z,
“4. Promoting Financial System Stability
5. Supervising and Regulating Financial Institutions and Activities
7. Promoting Consumer Protection and Community Development”
All of this falls under the rubric of saving the banking system from itself.
Financial stability is the banking stability and they are stable, there were very bankruptcies among the banks last year. Consumers are the consumers of the banking services. Seems like banking services are going Ok. What is the problem here?
Thomas Golladay
NR, the rioters who violently breached the capital were arrested and are being charged as they should be.
The ones who came later and were waved in by cops, should not be as they were waved in and did not riot and left when told to.
Major differences and nuance here you fail to grasp.
NL
Z — “stable prices and maximum sustainable employment”
Unstable prices –> inflation –> bad for banking because inflation can eat into interest income and destroy your currency
Unstable prices –> deflation –> bankrupts companies –> defaults –> loan losses
Employment is directly related to inflation/deflation. Sustainable employment is at the so-called natural level, whereby there is no inflation or deflation.
You seem to think that those two mandates are there for the public, no there are there for the banking system.
anon y'mouse
the only sustainable employement (or unemployment) is that which provides for human needs without destroying the environment.
NAIRU no existe’
Z
Mallam (NL),
From the Federal Reserve itself:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/pf_1.pdf
The Federal Reserve System is the central bank of the United States. It performs five general functions to promote the effective operation of the U.S. economy and, more generally, the public interest.
Z
Z
Mallam (NL),
You’re arguing yourself in such tight circles that you are getting dizzy.
BUT then …
“I am not absolving the FED of anything”
I’m starting to “get it”. The Fed has no responsibility to the public because consumers aren’t actually people in the context of the Fed’s mind but only as “consumers of the banking services” and since the Fed is serving the banks they are serving the people as well.
I’m a little confused about this though: what is it that the Fed is supposed to protect consumers from?
Z
Mel
Re the FED:
Michael Hudson’s book _Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy_ has a lot to say about the actions of the Federal Reserve bank around the events of 2008.
The official “vanilla” functions of the FED are vital to doing business in the U.S. That’s what the talk of consumer protection is about. The FED also serves as a sort of lobbyist for the biggest banks, and a conduit for elite control over the economy. That is less healthy.
NL
Z – “what is it that the Fed is supposed to protect consumers from?”
For individuals consumers, from seizure of credit flow (i.e., credit cards, mortgage, automotive loans, etc) to facilitate purchases and from seizure of financial product provision (i.e., annuities, insurance, investment, etc) to facilitate value storage.
Companies of all sizes are also consumers in that they consume loans of various duration to facilitate economic activity.
When the pandemic started, economic activity dived, which should have sent many corporate entities into bankruptcy, yet this did not happen (except for some retail and some such). The FED provided ensured that the private banks provide the companies with plenty of low-interest credit.
Hugh
The Fed is supposed to regulate banks but it hasn’t for decades. It was instrumental in creating the conditions that led to the 2008 meltdown and preventing holding banks and their executives from paying any consequences for the meltdown.
Have to be careful in definitions. The Fed defined any rise in workers’ wages as inherently inflationary. Even where there wasn’t any, the Fed would say it was moving to pre-empt inflation. At the same time, the Fed has been juicing the stock markets creating multi-trillion dollar bubbles which pose a much greater existential threat to our economy and financial system. But as all that subsidizes the rich, it’s OK.
I have to say too that during the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, Bernanke did all kinds of things that the Fed had no authority to do from the bailout of the banks to the bailouts of AIG, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley.
Z
NL,
correction:
I’m starting to “get it”. The Fed has no responsibility to the public because consumers aren’t actually people in the context of the Fed’s mind but only as “consumers of the banking services” and since the Fed is serving the banks they are serving consumers as well.
I’m a little confused about this though: what is it that the Fed is supposed to protect consumers from?
Z
NL
Z – a reply is in moderation.
I partly agree with Hugh above.
Inflation is essentially = labor wage growth, and controlling inflation essentially means keeping labor wages from rising. 2008 was probably a giant screw up. But the corporations are more guilty in juicing up their share prices than the FED. The corporate chieftains will rather spend money on share buyback than capital investment. Until Reagan, share buybacks had been illegal (since the 1930s FDR time) and a kind of market manipulation. But then the Congress made them legal. The share price is going up because as the corporations buy their own stock, this creates artificial demand for share and there is fewer shares in circulation. I do not see how the FED ban or suppress this practice. It just does not have the power. The corporate chiefs would be all over the Congress, if it tried to do this.
Z
Mallam (NL),
Not that it will change your mind or cure your intellectual dishonesty …
https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/pf_1.pdf
The Federal Reserve was established to serve the public interest.
Z
Hugh
The Fed is supposed to be a regulator of banks. The Fed could tell banks that corporations that engaged in stock buybacks were artificially inflating their valuation and were less credit worthy. It could have banned operations like repos in any way associated with corporation engaged in stock buybacks. The Fed has a lot of ways of influencing/pressuring corporations all of whom need credit in some form, and guess who is the ultimate source of credit. The Fed.
NL
Z
Of course, it is in the public interest that the banking system functions properly and a functioning banking system is essential to economic well-being. But the purpose of the FED is ensure that the banking system functions and through this means to contribute to the public interest.
Somehow, I feel like it is yours and Hugh’s views that the FED must go out and beyond its function as a banking regulator to remedy the misdeeds of others. Hugh, why can the corporations grow some heart and responsibility and beg the Congress to ban buybacks? Why can’t the Congress perform its responsibility and ban the buybacks? Obviously, I can only conclude that the corporate chiefs and Congress do not see buybacks as a bad thing. And how can the FED impose its view on a elected body and industry leaders?
I mean this is like simple logic, where am I being dishonest? Not everything is like what it seems and what it seems it may not be. A explanation of how the FED protects the consuming public is still in moderation.
Hugh
My point is that the Fed is essentially run by and for the banks and financial system, The Fed is supposed to be the regulator of banks and has vast power over them. This is a power that it seldom exercises. But in 2008 to help a corrupt financial system, it went the other way and used huge powers it had never been granted to bail out that system.
Z
Mallam (NL),
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/18/fed-to-allow-big-banks-to-resume-share-buybacks-with-limitations.html
Z
NL
Z,
No, no – the ban on share buyback was in the CARES act passed by the Congress:
“The $2.1 trillion CARES Act, which Congress passed in response to the coronavirus pandemic, includes a ban on corporate stock buybacks. Specifically, the law prohibits large corporations that receive loans or loan guarantees authorized under the legislation from buying their own or their parent company’s stock.”
NL
And the ban was temporary, which further shows that the Congress thinks share buyback are good:
This ban continues until 12 months after such a loan is no longer outstanding. Here is an overview of the share buyback ban in the CARES Act, and why it was included.
The Congress also banned dividends payment and increases in executive pay. The FED merely implemented the will of the Congress. And when Mnuchin disagreed with Powell, the latter submitted to the former. The Congress rules!
NL
Hugh,
I don’t disagree with you. I just think that it is by design and not by perversion or corruption of the original intent. How much public is in the FED? Now just the 6 governors (selected by the President, confirmed by the Senate) in the FOMC, that’s it! The other 5 members of the FOMC are just banking executives that rose through the ranks. All staff and research are from private banks. The FED does not take any money from the government/taxpayer. Decisions of the FOMC are made by consensus. They operate like high priests caring not to explain themselves much to us or educate us on how the monetary system works. Their pronouncements are obscure on purposes. It is not our right to question them.
Returning to Z,
I can see how my views could be called contradictory, because of the one hand I accept that the FED works in the public interest and on the other I claim that it pays no regard to the public and is completely independent from it.
In reality, there is no contradiction. The FED works in the public interest by ensuring a steady stream of credit to individuals, households and businesses to facilitate purchase of things and progression of economic activity. The FED also ensures a steady supply of financial instruments to the same individuals, households and businesses to facilitate storage of value for retirement and passing on to children. The FED also attempts to ensure (with a more limited success) that the prices of what the regular people buy do not rise sharply and most people are employed. We are in the midst of a pandemic, yet the housing market is booming urged on by the low interest rates, industrial production is expanding, the stock market is booming and the public corporations remain operational (except for some retail; and small businesses without ready access to the financial markets have it bad). Would you rather have it the other way around?
Now, how the FED engineered this pandemic miracle is none of our business. The FED is not obligated by the Congress to explain anything to us or to hear from us. The two meetings that the Chair has with the Congress and the statements of the FOMC meetings issued for the financial markets are the extent the FED is obligated and willing to communicate with us. The FED has no further responsibilities to the public beyond the flow of credit and financial instruments and the best possible monetary/employment stability. Wealth inequality is not a financial market issue, it is a political economy issue that needs to be resolved in the Congress. And if our Congress does not listen to us — that’s just too bad.
It is true that the FED policies is a proximal cause of the wealth inequality. But I also think that it is an inevitable outcome of the ability of the FED to have the stream of credit flow to us. The choices are basically a) allow the individuals, households and businesses to go bankrupt, ie, liquidate everything or b) save the majority through plenty of credit and see the inequality rise. Choice a) is a no brainer to me. It is the job of the Congress to ensure availability of opportunity and wealth to everyone.
El Erian and others are now beating the drums of the FED is creating too much money. I think what these people are trying to say (and it had been said some months ago that the Congress needs to do its job and ensure further recovery through fiscal policy) is that it is the time for the FED to call it a day and have a vacation. When the stream of credit ends, the millionaire Congress-people will start feeling financial pain, and their constituents will feel even more pain. Maybe then the Congress will stop doing its job on fiscal policy.
To further accusations of intellectual dishonesty, all I can raise is the defense of thick skullness on the part of my accusers, and leave it at that.
kj1313
Maybe it’s time to admit that the problem isn’t the Fed but Capitalism itself. The Fed, The World Bank, IMF, Wall St etc etc etc serves capital.
Z
Mallam (NL),
Read: https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/pf_1.pdf
and you’ll find that you’re wrong that the FED has no further responsibilities to the public beyond the flow of credit and financial instruments and the best possible monetary/employment stability.
But I’m sure you’ll continue going on making up your own incoherent version of the Fed …
Z
Z
Mallam (NL),
Sure, pal …
https://www.federalreserve.gov/supervisionreg/consumer-compliance.htm
Various consumer protection, fair lending, fair housing, and community reinvestment laws apply to financial institution interactions with customers and communities. A primary Federal Reserve responsibility is to ensure that the financial institutions under its jurisdiction comply with applicable laws and regulations established by Congress and the federal regulatory agencies.
Z
NL
Z – I am obviously obtuse. Can you please copy-paste the part in the linked pdf that I am missing and that addresses the FED’s public responsibilities.
Thank you.
NL
Z- I guess you’re probably mean this:
The Federal Reserve was established to serve the public interest.
But it serves the public by doing things see below. How is different from what I said. Let’s just stop our discussion here and agree to disagree, although I have no where I go wrong.
> conducts the nation’s monetary policy to promote maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates in the U.S. economy;
• promotes the stability of the financial system and seeks to minimize and contain systemic risks through active monitoring andengagement in the U.S. and abroad;
• promotes the safety and soundness of individual financial institutions and monitors their impact on the financial system as a whole;
fosters payment and settlement system safety and efficiency
through services to the banking industry and the U.S. government
that facilitate U.S.-dollar transactions and payments; and
• promotes consumer protection and community development
through consumer-focused supervision and examination, research
and analysis of emerging consumer issues and trends, community
economic development activities, and the administration of consumer
laws and regulations.
davidly
NL: I’m not sure what you mean by “Germans know what they are talking about” – though I will submit that they have a better overall sense of the sanctity of the private sphere and one’s personal right to freedom of expression. Still, I wouldn’t take the headline tweeted round the world too literally considering the fact that her comment included that only the state has the right to prohibit speech, which the German state, in fact, does, as it relates to the Hitler salute and ownership of Nazi era regalia.
For sure there are issues of monopoly to be worked out, that is, whether or not certain social media platforms amount to a public utility. But as things stand Twitter is perfectly well within its own right to free expression to ban anyone it wants, and the alternative Merkel alludes to is just as problematic.
KT Chong
Here is a rare video footage that shows the actual shooter of Ashli Babbitt, at the very moment when he aimed, shot and killed the crazed rioter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsB9LlDYF30
The video was uploaded on January 7, a day after the attempted and failed coup on January 6; but it has not gotten much attention.
As the video shows, the shooter was NOT a Capitol police. The man was clad in a black suit and wore black gloves. That is NOT the attire of a police officer who was on-duty — or even of one who was undercover or in plain clothes.
He was a proverbial “Man in Black”, i.e., a secret service protective agent. 🕴️
I know the Capitol police claimed it was one of theirs who shot, killed and stopped Ashli Bobbitt, (implying that it was them who had protected and saved the Congress legislatures who were sheltering in the House chamber beyond that hallway.) However, given that they had already lied about many other things about the attempted/failed coup including refusing help from FBI and National Guards before the riot, and that many Capitol cops actually abetted the rioters, and that some of them could have provided inside help to the insurrection… I wouldn’t put too much faith in their words. Cops LIE, a lot. Get over it. 🤷
Here are some common-sense conjectures and what we know about the situation:
⚫ Secret Service agents must have been assigned to guard, protect and secure the Congress and its legislature members. The hallway (the one that the mobs tried to break into) was leading straight into the House chamber of the Congress, where its legislature members were sheltering.
⚫ The mobs and rioters were gathered outside the door and trying to break through doors and force their way into the hallway and chamber. As all available videos show, they were behaving aggressively and violently. They were breaking glasses and smashing doors, destroying and looting government properties.
⚫ The aggressive, violent mobs were clearly NOT peaceful. There was no reason to think that, once they breached through the door into the chamber, they would suddenly become peaceful or cease to be aggressive and violent.
⚫ Based on the actions, attitudes and behaviors that those mobs were exhibiting: there was every reason to believe that the mobs, once they broke into the hallway, would attack and harm the legislature members.
⚫ Ashli Babbit was among those aggressive, violent mobs and rioters. She was climbing over a smashed glass panel of a barricaded door, breaching into the hallway leading into the House chamber of the Congress, where House members were sheltering. She was behaving aggressively and violently. There was no reason to believe that she would be peaceful once she broke into the hallway.
⚫ As shown in other widely-available videos, Ashli Babbitt was wearing a backpack while she was breaching into the inner hallway. The Secret Service protective agent had no way of knowing what the aggressive, crazed woman had in her backpack. It was NOT unreasonable for the Secret Service agent to assume that she could have a bomb, pipe bombs, guns and/or other weapons in the backpack.
⚫ The primary duty of a Secret Service protective agent is NOT to arrest people or enforce law and order. He is NOT a cop or police. His primary duty is to guard and protect his assignment(s), to ensure the safety of his VIP, and to use whatever means necessary to accomplish that mission. He does NOT arrest people. He should NOT even try. He sees and detects a threat to the person(s) he is assigned to protect, he neutralizes her and put her down A-S-A-P. He does NOT and should NOT try to “arrest” her or do anything else that could risk the life and safety of his assignment. And THAT is exactly what we expect and want out of a Secret Service agent or bodyguard who is assigned to guard and protect someone: the President, a Congress legislature, a VIP, a witness or anyone in a protective custody, etc.
⚫ Let’s put everything together and go through the logic: Ashli Babbitt was behaving aggressively and violently along with the mobs and rioters. She was breaching into the barricaded (meaning off-limit and “stay out!”) hallway that was leading into the chamber where House members were sheltering. She was wearing an unidentified backpack that could potentially have a bomb or deadly weapon. She posed an immediate threat to the VIP who were sheltering in the chamber. The Secret Service agents guarding the hallway (the last line of defense) needed to be immediately neutralized and put down that threat before she could successfully breached into the hallway and use whatever potential bomb or weapon she might be carrying.
So.
BANG!
She’d ded. 💀
And she won a Darwin award. 🏆 (And good riddance to the ded Trumpanzee.)
Finally,
⚫ The Secret Service agent was doing his job to guard and protect the Congress House chamber — and its members who were sheltering there — when he shot and killed the aggressive and crazed rioter who wearing an unidentified backpack and trying to breach into the chamber = QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. He will NOT face any charge for killing that Trumpanzee, and It’s a Good Thing. 👍
Most importantly, he made the right call to stop the breach at the critical moment. 👏
NL
Z – from your quote above
“A primary Federal Reserve responsibility is to ensure that the financial institutions under its jurisdiction comply with applicable laws and regulations —> established by Congress established by Congress <—
yes, the FED will implement what the Congress legislated. I wrote this over and over and over.
This was my whole point from the beginning.
The culprit is the Congress and not the FED! I rest my case.
NL
davidly
But as things stand Twitter is perfectly well within its own right to free expression to ban anyone it wants,
I think that is a big problem, because all of the internet is private, which means there is no protected speech rights on the internet at all. We basically proclaim freedom of speech and then exempt from it private institutions, promote private ownership at the expense of the public domain and end up not having a sphere with speech rights, which basically makes us look hypocritical.
It seems to me (although further thinking is in order here) Hitler was an expression of the German corporate wishes and impulses to control and sensor the discourse in the otherwise relatively liberal Weimar Republic. The corporations needed it to suppress the socialist and communists movements. We may entering the time when the dominant narrative we are the best of the bad options will come in doubt. Here, we may be seeing these impulses in its naked form.
Z
Mallam (NL),
All you do is talk in circles about the Fed, trying to make some idiotic point that the Fed was created by Congress so it’s inherently innocent since it didn’t create itself … WHAT ORGANIZATION EVER HAS? … and nothing that it ever does is ever its fault anyway since Congress could just abolish it and that all that the Fed ultimately has any responsibilities to is the banks, not the public anyway.
And you keep coming back to that over and over again in different ways, tangling your logic, even creatively misinterpreting that when it states on a Federal Reserve document that “The Federal Reserve was established to serve the public interest” that that is actually just a semantical game that the innocent Fed plays, that in reality they serve the public only by serving the banks.
How intellectually dishonest does one have to be to claim that the plain meaning of the Fed’s words on their own website are not what the Fed actually means, that’s there is some cloaked meaning to its words and that we don’t get it? And if we don’t get it then that means that the Fed is purposely misleading the public. That doesn’t seem to harmonize with your claims that the Fed isn’t doing wrong to the public.
Then you’ll come back and spill nine hundred words saying that I don’t really get it, that it’s more nuanced than that but then you’ll be right back again, like a propagandist who doesn’t give a sh*t about the truth only about what they are trying to sell and write the same sh*t again in a different way: the Fed ultimately has no responsibility to the public but to take care of the banks.
And I’ve pointed out to you repeatedly that if the Fed was just there to serve the banks and only consequently the public then it wouldn’t have on its own website that Regulating Financial Institutions and Activities and Promoting Consumer Protection and Community Development are part of their purposes and functions, which essentially means that they are also supposed to protect the public FROM the banks in some respects something that they have dismally failed at at the public’s expense (see: Financial Crisis 2008).
Then you’ve come back and tried twisting it a different way and have written that the Fed is only supposed to protect consumers from market disruptions so again it’s all about the banks and nothing about the public. And I’ve pointed out to you that on the Fed’s website it states:
Various consumer protection, fair lending, fair housing, and community reinvestment laws apply to financial institution interactions with customers and communities. A primary Federal Reserve responsibility is to ensure that the financial institutions under its jurisdiction comply with applicable laws and regulations established by Congress and the federal regulatory agencies.
Think they may have come up a little short on that responsibility to the public during the era of “liar loans”?
Now you’re back with this nonsense:
“Implement” is an interesting passive word choice in regards to regulations. How the Fed failed the public was that they didn’t enforce existing regulations. And that’s one of the many ways the Fed has failed to serve the public’s interests.
But there is no use arguing with someone as intellectually dishonest as you, so keep on going about spouting your bullsh*t, I can’t stop you. No one can ever stop a dedicated propagandist who refuses to listen to anything that he doesn’t want to hear and doesn’t give one damn bit about the truth and only about what they’re trying to mislead people into believing.
Z
NL
Z – Some people have thick skulls, sorry.
Z
NL,
Then there’s people that lie like you.
Z
NL
Z- No, I did not lie. But you seem to be trying to satisfy your need to be always right by claiming that your opponent lied when it is clear that you did not know enough about the FED and were bested in an argument. Just accept it and move on… no need to insult anyone.
Z
Ha ha ha ha ha …
Z
Z
Mallam’s infallible Fed.
It’s Congress’s fault that the Fed doesn’t enforce the regulations that Congress wrote.
The Fed’s just doing what it’s supposed to do …
Z
Z
Mallam’s Origin of Guilt Theory …
If the Congress didn’t write the regulations then the Fed wouldn’t have failed to enforce them.
So you see, it’s not the Fed’s fault!
Z
NL
Z – it is nice to “see” you laughing. Smiles extend life.
“It’s Congress’s fault that the Fed doesn’t enforce the regulations that Congress wrote.”
If there is a case that the FED does not enforce a legislature passed by the Congress, then naturally the Congress is also responsible for holding the FED accountable. The FED is not accountable to the people, the governors (a total of 6 now) are NOT elected. The remaining members of FOMC (the decision making body) are banking executives. The Congress decided on your behalf that the monetary policy should be left mostly in the private hands.
“If the Congress didn’t write the regulations then the Fed wouldn’t have failed to enforce them.”
Yes, pretty much. What is so puzzling here?
NL
Z – Here’s a very important article from El Erian from this morning:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-10/rising-u-s-treasury-yields-flash-a-warning-sign
Basically it says that the faceless private financial decision makers are leaning toward shutting down further funding of the US government for the reason the US is no longer a ‘safe’ country.
“hesitancy on the part of Treasury buyers … consistent with the considerable market chatter about how government bonds, being so highly repressed by the Fed and facing an asymmetrical outlook for yield moves, are no longer ideal for mitigating risk.”
davidly
NL: “I think that is a big problem, because all of the internet is private, which means there is no protected speech rights on the internet at all. We basically proclaim freedom of speech and then exempt from it private institutions, promote private ownership at the expense of the public domain and end up not having a sphere with speech rights, which basically makes us look hypocritical.”
It’s absolutely hypocritical. I agree this is where the problem lies. My point in only that Merkel, true to form, has attempted, I assume, to platz her voice on the matter in contradiction with the force of her government’s action, on the one hand, while maintaining the hocus pocus argument justifying foremost state power over its people.
With the Network Enforcement Act, the federal government (the Merkel administration) only recently legally obliged the operators of large platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Youtube to intervene actively, independently and without further request by courts or authorities if they discover criminal content on their platforms.
Is she now saying they have to submit applications to the feds for permission on a case by case basis? And if they are violating some rights, why don’t they step in against these bad actors in Germany?
Because, as always, the feds wanna have both ways anything to their convenience, which includes holding monopolies to account in theory only.
It occurs to me only just now that this particular debate shines a light on what has become the traditional enablement of corporate power by the state, which I have anyway long perceived as nearly indistinguishable from one another. So this latest faux disagreement could be analogous to so many other things that the 1 percent whine about, as if.
NL
davidly
“Is she now saying they have to submit applications to the feds for permission on a case by case basis? And if they are violating some rights, why don’t they step in against these bad actors in Germany?”
I see. I am not super up to speed on this debate in Germany.
davidly
NL: As it turns out, neither was I. Forgive me for using my latest response to you to fuel my own writing and research. The compromise in said legislation eventually passed in the Bundestag means that, yes, platforms of a certain size must first decide what they need to purge within 24 hours (obvious illegality) versus 7 days (less obvious illegality) and save same date for a period of 6 months (if I recall correctly), but then, and here’s the funny kicker, maintain coordination with the judiciary (or responsible rep) so they can decide upon the legality of the purge.
davidly
“date” should read “data”.