Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Welcome to Hooverville, by Jeff Thomas

President Herbert Hoover was not to blame for the economic contraction that began shortly after he took office, although he was blamed by the Democrats for it. Could the same thing happen to Donald Trump? From Jeff Thomas at internationalman.com:

In 1928, Republican Herbert Hoover was elected as president of the US. He took office in March of 1929. The following October, the stock market crashed, heralding in the Great Depression. Millions of Americans lost their jobs and homes and/or starved in the ensuing years.

Countless people, having nowhere to live, set up shantytowns that came to be known as “Hoovervilles.” Their new residents relied for the most part on public charities or begging for whatever income they could attain.

Why was Mister Hoover blamed? Well, whenever there’s disaster, it’s human nature to want to put a face on the cause of the problem. We tend to need to have someone at whom we can point our angry finger. (Almost immediately after the shooting of John Kennedy, the public were shown a photo of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle; the day after the destroying of the Twin Towers, the television news showed a photo of Osama bin Laden. The viewers didn’t question whether these were indeed the culprits; they simply accepted them, as their need to have someone to blame was greater than their need to have truth.)

As a Republican, Mister Hoover became an easy target for Democrats seeking to further their own careers. Although the events that led up to the depression were caused by both Democrats and Republicans, both within politics and without, Mister Hoover was a convenient target for Democrats. In fact, the term “Hooverville” was created by Charles Michelson, publicity chief of the Democratic National Committee. Democrats also came up with other pejoratives, such as “Hoover blankets” for newspapers and “Hoover leather” for cardboard used in a shoe when the sole had worn through.

To continue reading: Welcome to Hooverville

Trump Picks Vocal Obamacare Critic Tom Price As HHS Secretary, by Tyler Durden

The quicker the deranged experiment known as Obamacare is dismantled, the better. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

In a choice that confirms Trump’s intentions to dismantle Obamacare, Reuters reports that President-elect Donald Trump will shortly announce he has chosen vociferous Obamacare critic Tom Price (R. Ga), an orthopedic surgeon from Georgia, as his Health and Human Services secretary to help him overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.

Chairman of the House Budget Committee Tom Price

“Chairman Price, a renowned physician, has earned a reputation for being a tireless problem solver and the go-to expert on healthcare policy, making him the ideal choice to serve in this capacity,” Trump said in a statement. “He is exceptionally qualified to shepherd our commitment to repeal and replace Obamacare and bring affordable and accessible healthcare to every American. I am proud to nominate him as Secretary of Health and Human Services.”

Price, who currently leads the House Budget Committee, has spent more than a decade in Congress and has become a close ally of GOP leadership. As a member of the House GOP Doctor’s Caucus, Price helped shape the healthcare plan that House Speaker Paul Ryan now pitches as his alternative to ObamaCare. Trump also slected consultant Seema Verma to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), a powerful agency that oversees government health programs and insurance standards.

Price is a vocal critic of ObamaCare and he brings a deep background in health legislation. In 2014 as the law faced a major challenge at the Supreme Court, Price authored his own plan to replace the law.

To continue reading: Trump Picks Vocal Obamacare Critic Tom Price As HHS Secretary

An ‘America First’ Trump Trade Policy, by Patrick J. Buchanan

Patrick J. Buchanan thinks an 18 percent value added tax (VAT) on imports is just what America needs to reopen all those shuttered factories. Why would other nations not just impose more taxes on American exports? Wouldn’t the VAT raise prices on all the Trump supporters who rightfully believe they are falling behind economically? Buchanan insists that other taxes will be cut to offset the VAT, but can he name a single time when any country has instituted a VAT and cut other taxes? If the country with the reserve currency (the US) runs a trade surplus, won’t that be globally deflationary, and won’t the higher foreign exchange value of the dollar make US goods less competitive internationally? Why won’t other countries just depreciate their fiat currencies enough to make up for the tax? What part of the decline in manufacturing jobs is attributable to higher productivity, substitution of capital for labor, and automation? (Hint: most of it; manufacturing output is close to its all time record and is 36 percent of US GDP, although manufacturing jobs have been in a steady decline. US agriculture  employs 2 to 3 percent of the population, but US farms produce multiples of what they produced when agriculture accounted for 3 out of 4 jobs.) For the answer to these and other problematic questions, look not to Buchanan for answers. However, here’s Buchanan’s proposal for a trade policy, at buchanan.org:

Donald Trump’s election triumph is among the more astonishing in history.

Yet if he wishes to become the father of a new “America First” majority party, he must make good on his solemn promise:

To end the trade deficits that have bled our country of scores of thousands of factories, and to create millions of manufacturing jobs in the USA.

Fail here, and those slim majorities in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin disappear.

The president-elect takes credit for jawboning William Clay Ford to keep his Lincoln plant in Louisville. He is now jawboning Carrier air conditioning to stay in Indiana and not move to Mexico.

Good for him. But these are baby steps toward ending the $800 billion trade deficits in goods America runs annually, or bringing back factories and creating millions of new manufacturing jobs in the USA.

The NAFTA Republicans tell us the plants and jobs are never coming back, that we live in a globalized world, that production will now be done where it can be done cheapest — in Mexico, China, Asia.

Yet, on Nov. 8, Americans rejected this defeatism rooted in the tracts of 19th-century British scribblers and the ideology of 20th-century globalists like Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

America responded to Trump’s call for a new nationalism rooted in the economic principles and patriotism of Hamilton and the men of Mount Rushmore: Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt.

The president-elect has declared the TPP dead, and says he and his negotiators will walk away rather than accept another NAFTA.

Again, good, but again, not good enough, not nearly.

The New International Economic Order imposed upon us for decades has to be overthrown.

For the root cause of the trade deficits bleeding us lies in U.S. tax laws and trade policies that punish companies that stay in America and reward companies that move production overseas.

To continue reading: An ‘America First’ Trump Trade Policy

Trump the Great, by Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts is willing to give Trump a chance. From Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing (to the extent that one still exists) are aligning with the corrupt oligarchy against president-elect Trump and the American people.

They are busy at work trying to generate hysteria over Trump’s “authoritarian personality and followers.” In other words, the message is: here come the fascists.

Liberals and progressives wailed and whined about “an all white male cabinet,” only to be made fools by Trump’s appointment of a black male and two women, one a minority and one a Trump critic.

The oligarchs are organizing their liberal progressive front groups to disrupt Trump’s inauguration in an effort to continue the attempt to delegitimize Trump the way the paid Maidan protesters were used in Kiev to delegitimize the elected Ukrainian government.

To the extent any of the Trump protesters are sincere and not merely paid tools of oligarchs, such as George Soros, military and financial interests, and global capitalists, they should consider that false claims and unjustified criticism can cause Trump and his supporters to close their ears to all criticism and make it easier for neoconservatives to influence Trump by offering support.

At this point we don’t know what a Trump government is going to do. If he sells out the people, he won’t be reelected. If he is defeated by the oligarchy, the people will become more radical.

We do not know how Washington insiders appointed to the government will behave inside a Trump presidency. Unless they are ideologues like the neoconservatives or agents of powerful interests, insiders survive by going along with the current. If the current changes under Trump, so will the insiders.

To continue reading: Trump the Great

 

Trump’s National Security Adviser Facilitated the Murder of Civilians in Afghanistan, by Gareth Porter

The media has not paid attention to Donald Trump’s national security advisor Lt. Gen. Michael J. Flynn’s record in Afghanistan. From Gareth Porter at antiwar.com:

After retired Lt. Gen. Michael J. Flynn spoke at the Republican National Convention, The Washington Post captured the prevailing media view of Flynn in the headline: “He was one of the most respected intel officers of his generation. Now he’s leading ‘Lock her up’ chants.”

Now that President-elect Donald Trump has chosen Flynn as his national security adviser, media coverage has given prominence to the more serious issue of Flynn’s denunciation of Islam as a “cancer” and other manifestations of his embrace of Islamophobia. But the mainstream media view of Flynn’s military record ignores his pivotal role in devising a targeting scheme that was the basis for an indiscriminate Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) campaign of killing and incarcerating Afghans suspected of being in the Taliban insurgency. The corporate media, which have never examined that dark chapter in the history of the Afghanistan war critically, have long treated the campaign as one of the few success stories of the war.

But as an investigation published by Truthout in 2011 revealed, the target list that JSOC used for its “night raids” and other operations to kill supposed Taliban was based on a fundamentally flawed methodology that was inherently incapable of distinguishing between Taliban insurgents and civilians who had only tangential contacts with the Taliban organization. And it was Flynn who devised that methodology.

To continue reading: Trump’s National Security Adviser Facilitated the Murder of Civilians in Afghanistan

Trump Moves as America Stands Still, by Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Donald Trump is showing a lot of “flexibility” as he stakes out his policy positions and fills his administration. We’re still waiting for even an iota of flexibility from the other side. From Raúl Ilargi Meijer at automatic earth.com:

Ever since the November 8 election, it’s been hard to write anything that makes actual sense, as evidenced by just about everything I’ve read in the past two weeks, little of which was particularly elevating, because just like before the vote, and just like in pre- and post-Brexit Britain, all there is left in the US are deeply dug-in heels.

Everything and everyone is standing still; dug-in heels do that for you. Problem is, of course, that standing still doesn’t get you anywhere. You’re going to have to move or you’ll be left behind. Somehow it’s wonderfully ironic that Donald Trump is the only main character in this play who’s moving, and he does so in more ways than one. It’s like he’s going head first against the latest braindead internet craze, mannequin. If he does it on purpose, I commend him for it.

Sure, one might say Obama has moved a little too, suggesting that a smooth transition of power is paramount, talking a whole different book from what he said about the Donald before November 8. But then Obama doesn’t have many other options. His job requires him to do it, and say it. Over the past few months, the impression has crept upon me that Obama is a mannequin, though not still and silent, but one machine-trained to say the perfect thing at the perfect moment. And then still lost.

As predicted pre-election by the precious few willing to ponder a view that’s not entirely partisan or one-sided, Trump now rolls back his most extreme views, and is not afraid to revisit climate change, or a potential Hillary investigation, nor does he shy away from denouncing the most outrageous right wing movements and viewpoints among his voters and supporters.

To continue reading: Trump Moves as America Stands Still

What Would an ‘America First’ Foreign Policy Look Like? by Justin Raimondo

The first item on Justin Raimondo’s agenda for Donald Trump is mending relations with Vladimir Putin and Russia. From Raimondo at antiwar.com:

As Donald Trump takes the reins and we all prepare for the next four years, the need to translate rhetoric into reality comes to the fore. Trump spent the campaign repeating a phrase that horrified the elites – especially the foreign policy Establishment – even adopting it as his official campaign theme: “America first.”

The elites were aghast because the phrase evokes the legacy of the biggest anti-interventionist movement in American history: the America First Committee, a coalition of conservative businessmen and progressive activists (including the socialist Norman Thomas) who not only opposed US entry into World War II, but also pointed to the authoritarian tendencies of the Franklin Roosevelt administration, which they feared would be exacerbated in wartime – as indeed they were.

Smeared by pro-war liberals and their Communist party allies as “Nazi sympathizers” — in the same way antiwar activists were later accused of being pro-Communist, pro-Saddam Hussein, pro-terroriost, etc. – the AFC has not fared well with historians, who, for the most part, are Roosevelt partisans, and globalists in any case. The America Firsters are the original “isolationists” the War Party warns us about, “dangerous” subversives who saw that in the quest for a “world order,” Americans would lose their old republic.

Which is precisely what happened.

Whether consciously or not, Trump has revived this long-disdained trend in American politics, and, what’s more, he has won. So how does –or should – he translate this kind of rhetoric into reality?

What follows is the first of a series of columns on what a foreign policy that puts “America first” would look like. Today we deal with US-Russian relations.

To continue reading: What Would an ‘America First’ Foreign Policy Look Like?

 

“What If Market Consensus Is Wrong” – A Hedge Fund Ponders The Alternative, by Francesco Filia

Interest rates may be rising not because economies are improving, but because central banks are pulling back from quantitative easing. If that’s the case, it could spell bad news for stocks. From Francesco Filia at Fasanara Capital, via zerohedge.com:

A week ago we posed a simple qustion:”is the market wrong” in bidding up risk assets in a time of rapidly tightening financial conditions. With the S&P likely set to rise above 2,200 today, a new all time high, the market at least for now, remains “right.” However, more doubt has emerged.

In a note from our friends at Fasanara Capital, CIO Francesco Filia repeats the question we posed last week, contemplating what may be a “delusion” emerging on the boundary between reflation/growth and a QE bubble unwind. As Filia puts it, “what if consensus is wrong: what if rates are rising due to the end of Quantitative Easing and not because of reflation/escape velocity on growth?” He continues:

Rates then rise without growth, perhaps even without much inflation. Indeed, rates started rising back in August, on momentous shifts in policy by BoJ (forced by capacity constraints and collateral damage). Such scenario is not good for equities, contrary to what currently believed by markets.”

Indeed, such a scenario would be the worst possible one: with potential stagflation on the horizon, the last thing markets can afford is a withdrawal in central bank support just as US deficit funding needs are set to spike, something we have been cautioning for the past two weeks.

In any event, if the market is wrong about this most fundamental signal, what else is it wrong about? Here are the key highlights of Fasanara’s thought:

Delusions: Rates Rising on Reflation/Growth or QE Bubble Unwind?

What if consensus is wrong: what if rates are rising due to the end of Quantitative Easing and not because of reflation/escape velocity on growth? Rates then rise without growth, perhaps even without much inflation. Indeed, rates started rising back in August, on momentous shifts in policy by BoJ (forced by capacity constraints and collateral damage). Such scenario is not good for equities, contrary to what currently believed by markets.

With Trump rising to power against all the odds of bookies, pollsters, a militant press, a reflexive army of pundits and an all-guns-out establishment, it is all too clear who are the big losers of these elections. After the supposed shocks of Brexit and Amerexit, you may imagine less and less market participants to pay attention next to pollsters, bookies and analysts in informing investment decisions at the next check point.

But there is a bigger loser, and that is the Efficient Market Hypothesis itself, a cornerstone of modern financial theory, which states that all relevant information are embedded in prices, making them fair prices. Going into the event a win by Trump was widely perceived to be an outright disaster. Coming off the event, after an initial shock, equity markets staged one of the most impressive rebounds in history. Clearly, this is not an example of rationale investment behaviour. From Armageddon to Paradise on Earth in just few hours. The market had known full well what the aftermath of a Trump win looked like, had been given plenty time to strategize on that, and yet it all seemed really new news. Ex-post, narratives of cash on the sidelines, retail coming in, fiscal expansion /reflation reality sinking in, are all handy but unconvincing scapegoats.

To continue reading: “What If Market Consensus Is Wrong” – A Hedge Fund Ponders The Alternative

 

Why Trump Should Offer Tulsi Gabbard a Senior Role in His Administration, by Michael Krieger

Tulsi Gabbard, the Democratic representative from Hawaii, may be the only Democrat in Washington for whom SLL has any respect. Apparently, Donald Trump does too. From Michael Krieger at libertyblitzkrieg.com:

Anyone who’s been reading me for more than a couple of days understands that I have serious reservations about Donald Trump. My concerns stem primarily from his authoritarian tendencies, as well as his stated disregard for civil liberties. Nevertheless, as I outlined in my post-election piece, Americans Roll the Dice With President Donald Trump, I very much want Trump to succeed, because this country needs him to succeed. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens are suffering under the weight of undue financial burdens, largely the result of an economy completely controlled by unethical and ruthless oligarchs thanks to their bought and paid for political stooges. This unholy union needs to be shattered before this country can be “made great again.”

Will Trump actually do what needs to be done? I have my doubts, but doubt isn’t going to lead to positive change. In these early months before Trump picks all of his personnel, it is imperative that we signal to him what would be acceptable behavior, and what would be considered unforgivable betrayal.

As such, from the very beginning I have advocated that Trump work closely with those forces in the opposition who actually want to make economic existence once again bearable for countless struggling Americans. Trump should ignore corporatist frauds irrespective of their political leanings (red/blue sports team colors), and unite the public along productive populist policy lines as opposed to blind, counterproductive partisan loyalties.

In this respect, I was very pleased to hear that Trump recently met with Democratic Rep. from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard. If you aren’t familiar with her, you need to get up to speed fast. I highlighted her courageous stance during the Democratic primary in February’s post, It’s Not Just the GOP – The Democratic Party is Also Imploding. Here’s what happened and what I thought it represented:

A rising star within the Democratic ranks, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, cut herself off from the party’s establishment by resigning from her post as vice-chairman of the Democratic National Committee and endorsing Bernie Sanders for president.

Her position with the DNC required her to stay neutral in the primaries, but she said that “the stakes are too high.” She announced her decision on Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and made a video where she explained her reasoning.

Gabbard, an Iraq war veteran, said she knows the cost of war firsthand. “I know how important it is that our commander-in-chief has the sound judgment required to know when to use America’s military power—and when not to use that power.”

The importance of this move cannot be understated. In no uncertain terms, this gesture publicly exposes the weakness of the “Clinton brand.” She clearly isn’t afraid of Hillary or of any repercussions from the Democratic Party elite, a fact that is underscored by the fact she came out with her endorsement after he got pummeled in South Carolina.

But let’s take a step back and think about this in the even bigger picture. You don’t get to Congress by being a political imbecile. On the surface, this move looks like career suicide, particularly since Hillary is probably about to clinch the nomination. Recall, Rep. Gabbard didn’t merely endorse Sanders after a bruising loss in South Carolina, she stepped down from her official position with the DNC to do so. This isn’t merely a statement, it’s the equivalent of dropping a neutron bomb on the Democratic establishment. So why did she do it?

While I think she genuinely agrees with Sanders on key issues, the reason she came out so aggressively is because she sees the writing on the wall. She’s playing the long game, and in the long game, Hillary Clinton represents a discredited and failed status quo, while Bernie Sanders represents a push toward the paradigm level change that will define the future.

Gabbard is not only brave, she’s politically astute and her primary stance will now pay tremendous dividends to her overall credibility moving forward. As such, Trump’s decision to meet with her the other day was a very positive move.

To continue reading: Why Trump Should Offer Tulsi Gabbard a Senior Role in His Administration

A Besieged Trump Presidency Ahead, by Patrick J. Buchanan

Many of those who are viscerally and deeply offended by Trump’s victory are going to be like nails on a chalk board for the entirety of his term. From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

After a week managing the transition, vice president-elect Mike Pence took his family out to the Broadway musical “Hamilton.”

As Pence entered the theater, a wave of boos swept over the audience. And at the play’s end, the Aaron Burr character, speaking for the cast and the producers, read a statement directed at Pence:

“(W)e are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir. But we truly hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values.”

In March, the casting call that went out for actors for roles in this musical celebration of “American values” read:

“Seeking NON-WHITE men and women.”

The arrogance, the assumed posture of moral superiority, the conceit of our cultural elite, on exhibit on that stage Friday night, is what Americans regurgitated when they voted for Donald Trump.

Yet the conduct of the “Hamilton” cast puts us on notice. The left neither accepts its defeat nor the legitimacy of Trump’s triumph.

His presidency promises to be embattled from Day One.

Already, two anti-Trump demonstrations are being ginned up in D.C., the first on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, by ANSWER, Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. A second, scheduled for Jan. 21, is a pro-Hillary “Million Woman March.”

While the pope this weekend deplored a “virus of polarization,” even inside the church, on issues of nationality, race and religious beliefs, that, unfortunately, is America’s reality. In a new Gallup poll, 77 percent of Americans perceived their country as “Greatly Divided on the Most Important Values,” with 7 in 8 Democrats concurring.

On the campuses, anti-Trump protests have not ceased and the “crying rooms” remain open. Since Nov. 8, mobs have blocked streets and highways across America in a way that, had the Tea Party people done it, would have brought calls for the 82nd Airborne.

In liberal Portland, rioters trashed downtown and battled cops.

Mayors Rahm Emanuel of Chicago and Bill de Blasio of New York have declared their cities to be “sanctuary cities,” pledging noncooperation with U.S. authorities seeking to deport those who broke into our country and remain here illegally.

Says D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, “I have asserted firmly that we are a sanctuary city.” According to The Washington Post, after the meeting where this declaration had been extracted from Bowser, an activist blurted, “We’re facing a fascist maniac.”

Such declarations of defiance of law have a venerable history in America. In 1956, 19 Democratic Senators from the 11 states of the Old Confederacy, in a “Southern Manifesto,” rejected the Supreme Court’s Brown decision ordering desegregation of the public schools.

Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, Mississippi Gov. Ross Barnett and Alabama Gov. George Wallace all resisted court orders to integrate. U.S. marshals and troops, ordered in by Ike and JFK, insured the court orders were carried out.

To see Rahm and de Blasio in effect invoking John C. Calhoun’s doctrine of interposition and nullification is a beautiful thing to behold.

To continue reading: A Besieged Trump Presidency Ahead