Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Trenches, Human Nature, and Numbers, by Robert Gore

Trump’s ship of state will be beset by a relentless barrage of torpodoes.

Donald Trump took on the Clinton machine and the Democratic party, his own party’s insiders, and the mainstream media. His personal appearances, tweets, uninhibitedness, and ability to articulate widespread frustrations inspired voters whose enthusiasm dwarfed his opponent’s rote support. She massively outspent, out-polled, out-focus-grouped, and out-endorsement-received Trump, but he outsmarted her. Her team was flattened by arrogance, overconfidence, and underestimating Trump. However, his supporters make a similar mistake if they now dismiss them as political roadkill.

The bodies on the highway are cartoon corpses; they spring, Roger Rabbit-like, back to life. Giving Trump his best case—that he’s motivated by a steadfast mixture of idealism and animosity towards the powers that be, and deeply concerned about the state of America—the problems he confronts are enormous and virtually intractable. They fall into three categories: trenches, human nature, and numbers.

THE PRIME DECEIT IS THAT

THEY CARE ABOUT YOU

cropped-prime-deceit-final-cover.jpg

AMAZON PAPERBACK

KINDLE EBOOK

The cartoon corpses have already taken to the earthworks for a war of attrition. The federal government, its thousands of contractors, and state and local governments have tens of millions of employees and beneficiaries. Most of them are mediocrities or worse who have little to offer private enterprise and are hostile to any change that shrinks the government’s power or funding.

At least 95 percent of what the federal government does will escape the purview of the Trump team. The small slice that draws their focus will run smack into committees, paralysis by analysis, endless consultations, inaction, obstruction, back-door appeals to friendly legislators, unfavorable media stories and editorials, demonstrations, lawsuits, and every other stratagem ever devised for stopping change in its tracks. Political parasites battling for their power and perks fight with the same ferocity as dug-in platoons.

As trench-mates they’ll have the media, whose already vicious attacks will only intensify. In his 2002 book Bias, former CBS journalist Bernard Goldberg noted that media coverage of homelessness came and went with Republican and Democratic administrations. We’ll soon see a jump in articles on homelessness and every other suddenly pressing socioeconomic problem imaginable. Those problems worsened during Obama’s tenure, but the media refused to take notice. Trump won’t even get a honeymoon before they’re “rediscovered.”

Good news will be distorted or ignored. December’s unemployment numbers will be the last major economic statistic to receive favorable spin. Any stats positive to Trump will be discounted as Obama residuals (if his blame of Bush is any indication, he’ll be taking credit for good numbers for at least four years), or the mainstream media will “discover” statistical flaws bloggers have been talking about for years.

How long before this war takes its toll on Trump and team? Human nature is human nature. Even if Trump is a rock, many of his team will go native in Washington. Why bear the slings and arrows, risking reputation and career for an amorphous cause like “Drain the Swamp,” when its so much easier and remunerative to play the power game? Washington and the media love nothing more than principled foes who turn into “pragmatic” friends. Ask David Brock.

What principles will anchor Trump’s presidency? Social mood carries presidents and stock markets on its ebbs and flows. What happens when the ebullience ebbs, the stock market heads south, and the economy falters? Does Trump increase or decrease the government’s intervention? Borrow more money? Raise or lower taxes? Who or what does he scapegoat if a wall, tariffs, promises of renewed corporate investment in the US, and infrastructure spending don’t cure what ails the economy? Does he divert attention with a new war somewhere? Does he live with the inevitable criticism and dissent, or does he use the government’s vast powers against his critics? Who knows? Human nature is human nature, and Trump is certainly human.

The numbers guarantee the ebb will come. Stocks fluctuate. Presidents are usually better off politically taking office when markets are down. Roosevelt assumed the helm the year after a major market low in 1932. Reagan took office a year a half before before another major low and thereafter was the beneficiary of positive social mood and a strong bull market. President Obama came to power just before the March 2009 low. Nixon, on the other hand, won a landslide in 1972 and was out of office two years later, after stocks tanked over 40 percent from their January 1973 peak. His fate is a caution to Trump supporters touting the current rally.

Stock market averages are unpredictable. More predictable are the consequences of two sets of hard numbers: debt and demographics. The national debt increased 88 percent during Obama’s eight years, to $19.976 trillion. A similar jump during the next eight years would take the debt to $37.554 trillion.

The government paid $432.64 billion in interest during 2016, at an average rate of 2.20 percent. Say historically low yields have bottomed and the trend is now up. If they return to the 4.785 percent the government paid when Obama took office, debt service on existing debt would be $955 billion and $1.797 trillion on that $37.554 trillion. Nothing says a bull market in yields (a bear market in bonds) stops at 4.785 percent. The debt itself is not static, growing at close to 10 percent a year the last eight years, far faster than the US economy has ever grown. We’re not going to grow our way out of this one. During the Obama administration real annual GDP growth never hit 3 percent.

Ugly demographics are kicking in. Baby Boomers are retiring. Birth rates having declined, fewer workers will be paying the taxes necessary to fund Boomers’ old age and medical payments. Those entitlements follow the Ponzi model: promised payments are made from current contributions. Payments are not invested for the long-term and benefits do not come from investment returns (which the government requires for programs in the private sector). Payouts are already greater than pay-ins and the difference will only increase in the coming years.

Most of the developed world is facing the same debt and demographics issues. Total global debt tops 325 percent of global GDP. The nature of debt—one entity’s debt is another entity’s asset—and its dispersion throughout the world means that debt collapse and deflation will be global.

Debt will define the Trump presidency. Commendably, he has prompted a long overdue skepticism and perhaps rejection of the politics and governance that have brought the nation and the world to the edge of financial ruin. Some of the right questions are finally being asked. Trump may not be the right answer, but Washington is so far gone that there are no politically right—meaning acceptable to the electorate—answers. Spending will be cut, promises broken, and revenue raised as the government tries to bridge the ever-widening fiscal chasm. A soft default on government debt via hyperinflation or an actual default are strong possibilities.

Most of us who loathe and oppose the government and what it represents would take it as a victory if, at the end of Trump’s presidency, the blob is slightly smaller, its tax receipts a little lower, it’s marginally less powerful, and it’s managing to live within its means. In a profoundly distressing way, as the government descends ever further into corruption and evil, it takes standards of acceptability, including those of its most ardent critics, with it.

WHEN STANDARDS WERE MUCH HIGHER

TGP_photo 2 FB

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK

Hollywood’s Screen of Lies, by Uncola

Meryl Streep gives America yet another reason not to pay attention to Hollywood and its stars. From Uncola at theburningplatform.com:

On Sunday, January 8, 2016, while waiting for the 10PM local news, I surfed through some channels and landed on NBC as the actress Meryl Streep was speaking. It was during the Golden Globes and I caught the tail end of her speech after she won the Cecil B. DeMille Award. This once-in-a-lifetime award is an honor conferred by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association for “outstanding contributions to the world of entertainment”.

As Streep was speaking, she appeared to have had the entire room entranced, even moving some of the Hollywood stars in the audience to tears. As the cameras panned over the brigade of befuddled, bespectacled, bearded and bare-legged clowns, you could see them overcome by raw emotion before Streep’s heartfelt words. Paradoxically, her delivery was not meant to be comedic. As I watched the scene unfold in complete disbelief, I thought to myself: “This isn’t a parody. It is real. It isn’t an act. It is actually happening”.

Referring to President Elect Donald Trump, Streep said:

It was that moment, when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter; someone he out-ranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back. It kind of broke my heart when I saw it, and I still can’t get it out of my head because it wasn’t in a movie; it was in real life.

Apparently, in the minds of movie mogul morons, the country has been taken over by extreme xenophobes, radical racists and blasphemous bigots who wish to deport all those of color as well as the foreign born. Meryl Streep and her fellow actors believe Trump to be a dictator in waiting who enjoys coldly mimicking the handicapped, and racially impure, for no other reason than the profusive and unrestrained hatred in his wicked heart.

To continue reading: Hollywood’s Screen of Lies

Will Obama’s ‘Good War’ in Afghanistan Continue? by Ron Paul

Donald Trump will supply the answer to the title question. From Ron Paul at ronpaulinstitute.org:

Last week, as the mainstream media continued to obsess over the CIA’s evidence-free claim that the Russians hacked the presidential election, President Obama quietly sent 300 US Marines back into Afghanistan’s Helmand Province. This is the first time in three years that the US military has been sent into that conflict zone, and it represents a final failure of Obama’s Afghanistan policy. The outgoing president promised that by the end of his second term, the US military would only be present in small numbers and only on embassy duty. But more than 8,000 US troops will remain in Afghanistan as he leaves office.

When President Obama was first elected he swore that he would end the US presence in Iraq (the “bad” war) and increase US presence in Afghanistan (the “good” war). He ended up increasing troops to both wars, while the situation in each country continued to deteriorate.

Why are the Marines needed in the Helmand Province? Because although the foolish and counterproductive 15-year US war in Afghanistan was long ago lost, Washington cannot face this fact. Last year the Taliban controlled 20 percent of the province. This year they control 85 percent of the province. So billions more must be spent and many more lives will be lost.

Will these 300 Marines somehow achieve what the 2011 peak of 100,000 US soldiers was not able to achieve? Will this last push “win” the war? Hardly! The more the president orders military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, the worse it gets. In 2016, for example, President Obama dropped 1,337 bombs on Afghanistan, a 40 percent increase from 2015. According to the United Nations, in 2016 there were 2,562 conflict-related civilian deaths and 5,835 injuries. And the Taliban continues to score victories over the Afghan puppet government.

To continue reading: Will Obama’s ‘Good War’ in Afghanistan Continue?

Hideous Constellation of Threats and Challenges Facing Mexico, by Don Quijones

Mexico is steadily moving up the list of candidates to initiate the next global economic and financial crisis, the snowball that starts the avalanche. From Don Quijones at wolfstreet.com:

Things are rapidly going from bad to worse in Mexico. Hundreds of people were arrested and a handful of people killed over the past week as peaceful protests against the government’s hike of gasoline prices (by as much as 20% in some states) descended into widespread looting and rioting. The mood on the street was hardly helped when Mexico’s deeply unpopular president, Enrique Peña Nieto, tried to defend his actions by asking the public, “What would you have done?”

For a lot of people, the answer’s clear: a lot of things, very differently. Right at the top of the list would be launching an all-out war against the endemic culture of corruption plaguing virtually all levels of government. But now, time is fast running out as Mexico now faces a hideous constellation of threats and challenges, all at the same time.

NAFTA Hangover

There are few bigger threats to Mexico right now than the President Elect Donald Trump, who last week announced the appointment of Robert Lighthizer as the United States’ new Trade Representative. Lighthizer, a trade lawyer and vocal supporter of protectionist policies, is expected to play a leading role in the renegotiation of NAFTA, which helped transform Mexico into a low-cost industrial powerhouse while also shackling its economic fate to its northern neighbor:

The U.S. accounts for 80% of Mexico’s exports, 49% of its imports, and 60% of all its foreign direct investment.

To continue reading: Hideous Constellation of Threats and Challenges Facing Mexico

Trump Says Only ‘Fools’ See Good Ties With Russia as Bad, by Nafeesa Syeed

Trump’s determination to establish better relations with Russia and Vladimir Putin were not dented by the report he received Friday from the US intelligence agencies. From Nafeesa Syeed at bloomberg.com:

https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/io4MMB8bLf.U/v0/840x-1.jpg

Vladimir Putin Photographer: Natalia Kolesnikova/AFP via Getty Images

Facing calls to strike back at Russia for what U.S. intelligence agencies have termed Moscow’s interference with the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign, Donald Trump instead suggested warmer relations between the two countries.

The president-elect took to Twitter on Saturday to discuss the potential U.S.-Russia relationship under his administration, a day after U.S. spy chiefs briefed him on the Russian measures they said were directed by President Vladimir Putin.

Read the full report here (PDF).

“Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing,” Trump said in a series of three tweets. “Only ‘stupid’ people, or fools, would think it is bad! We have enough problems around the world without yet another one.”

“When I am President, Russia will respect us far more than they do now,” Trump assured his 19 million Twitter followers.

On Friday, top U.S. intelligence officials met with the president-elect at Trump Tower in New York to present evidence that Putin personally ordered cyber and disinformation attacks on the U.S. campaign.

Putin developed “a clear preference” for Trump to win, the agencies said in a declassified summary of their findings. The agencies said they “assess Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him,” according to the report.

To continue reading: Trump Says Only ‘Fools’ See Good Ties With Russia as Bad

A Case Study in the Creation of False News, Paul Craig Roberts

Heaven forbid! Donald Trump doesn’t trust the intelligence agencies! It’s not like they lie or anything. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

For many weeks we have witnessed the extraordinary attack by the CIA and its assets in Congress and the media on Donald Trump’s election. In an unprecedented effort to delegitimize Trump’s election as the product of Russian interference in the election, the CIA, media, senators and representatives have consistently made wild accusations for which they have no evidence. The CIA’s message to Trump is clear: Get in line with our agenda, or we are going to mess you over.

It is clear that the CIA is warring against Trump. But the CIA’s media assets have turned the facts on their head and are blaming Trump for having a negative view of the CIA.

Consider the January 4 Wall Street Journal article by Damian Paletta and Julian E. Barnes, which begins: “President-elect Donald Trump, a harsh critic of U.S. intelligence agencies . . .” The two presstitutes set up their false news story by putting the shoe on the other foot. It is Trump who is the harsh critic rather than the victim of the CIA’s harsh accusations. Set up this way, the story continues:

“White House officials have been increasingly frustrated by Mr. Trump’s confrontations with intelligence officials. ‘It’s appalling,” the official said. “No president has ever taken on the CIA and come out looking good.’”

Now that the story is Trump taking on the CIA and not the CIA taking on Trump, the case can be built against Trump:

Analysts accustomed to more cohesion with the White House are “jarred” by Trump’s skepticism of the CIA’s assessment that Putin got him elected. Trump is supposed to respond to the allegation by saying: I am not legitimate. Here take back the presidency.

To continue reading: A Case Study in the Creation of False News

 

The False Economic Recovery Narrative Will Die In 2017, by Brandon Smith

This is the year we find if Brandon Smith’s controversial thesis about Donald Trump—that the real powers that be wanted him elected to discredit conservatives and the liberty movement—holds water or is all wet. From Smith at alt-market.com:

Yes, the narrative of the “new normal” has been around for so long now that many people have simply grown used to it. The assumption is that the fiscal “new normal” has become the fiscal “normal,” and though the fundamentals continue to strain under the weight of poor global demand and historic debt levitated by extraneous fiat stimulus, the masses feel far less fear than is warranted. Hey, why should they? We’ve managed around eight years skating on thin ice, why shouldn’t we expect eight more years of the same?

The banking elites have done the job they set out to do, which was to drive the economy to the very edge of the financial cliff, and then keep it suspended there until the general public became comfortable living next door to the abyss.

Why do this? Well, the greater dynamic at play here is something the average person will not understand or refuses to examine — economics today is about mass psychology. The economy is a tool, or a weapon, by which international financiers can influence the public mind and the emotions of the mob. In order to grasp the mechanics of economics it is not enough to deal in statistics and trade principles; one must also grasp human behavior and how it is manipulated. One must acknowledge that in economics we witness the transmutation of societies by word and by force, by chaos and by order. Economics is alchemy.

To contiue reading: The False Economic Recovery Narrative Will Die In 2017,

 

Trump to Build Death Camps for Trans-gendered People of Color: Will Deport All Women, by Fred Reed

Sure today’s identity politics has gone beyond the point of absurdity, but what else do liberals have? From Fred Reed on a guest post at theburningplatform.com:

I love it. Of all the things about Trump that our silly-ass Aunt Polly media might have considered–policy toward China, relations with Iran, reform of taxes–they seemed most agitated about…his sex life. Yes. Sure, he is a misogynist, homophobe, Islamophobe, fascist, Nazi, anti-Semite, and probably kicks his dog. Maybe a cannibal. But the truly horrid discovery was…that he thinks dirty thoughts about girls (as we all do–unless we are girls, and think dirty thoughts about boys) Shocking. Shocking. Clearly he hates women.

The famous dirty-talk tape is my favorite example of high-school outrage coupled with horrified old-maid moralism. It reveals what any sensible person would have assumed– egotism (a rare thing among the rich and famous), and a sexual interest in women. How is this misogyny? If there is one thing normal women don’t like, it is men without sexual interest in themselves. And who can blame them? Who wants an asexual boyfriend?

What seems most to have set people off is the “grab em by the pussy” remark. Crude language, of the sort normally used by men and women among themselves, where it is appropriate. It is where Trump used it. For the record, the idea that women are not human, don’t talk dirty, do not have rude sexual thoughts like everybody else, do not have the same kinky fantasies that men have, is twaddle. We are a sexual species. We think about those things. Deal with it.

Actually, most women seem to have dealt with it quite well. Some fifty-three percent of white women and forty-three percent of black women voted for him. Apparently they did not react with the required prissy horror.

To continue reading: Trump to Build Death Camps for Trans-gendered People of Color: Will Deport All Woman

Trump Aims to Cut the Neocon Deep State Off at the Knees, by Charles Hugh Smith

The real tragedy is that the neocon deep state got so big and powerful that it is sorely in need of a knee-capping. From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

The Neocon-Neoliberals must be fired and put out to pasture before they do any more harm.

I have long held that America’s Deep State–the unelected National Security State often referred to as the Shadow Government–is not a unified monolith but a deeply divided ecosystem in which the dominant Neocon-Neoliberal Oligarchy is being challenged by elements which view the Neocon-Neoliberal agenda as a threat to national security and the interests of the United States.

I call these anti-Neocon-Neoliberal elements the progressive Deep State.

If you want a working definition of the Neocon-Neoliberal Deep State, Hillary Clinton’s quip–we came, we saw, he died–is a good summary: a bullying, arrogance-soaked state-within-a-state pursuing an agenda of ceaseless intervention while operating a global Murder, Inc., supremely confident that no one in the elected government can touch them.

Until Trump unexpectedly wrenched the presidency from the Neocon’s candidate. The Neocon Deep State’s response was to manufacture a mass-media hysteria that Russia had wrongfully deprived the Neocon’s candidate (Hillary Clinton) of what was rightfully hers: the presidency. (The Neocons operate their own version of the divine right of Political Nobility.)

The Neocon-Neoliberals’ strategy was to delegitimize Trump’s victory by ascribing it to “Russian Hacking,” a claim that remains entirely unsubstantiated. Now that this grasping-at-straws Hail Mary coup attempt by a politicized C.I.A. and its corporate media mouthpiece has failed, the Neocon Deep State is about to find out the Progressive Deep State finally has a president who is willing and able to cut the Neocon-Neoliberals off at the knees.

Trump Is Working On A Plan To Restructure, Pare Back The CIA And America’s Top Spy Agency.

To continue reading: Trump Aims to Cut the Neocon Deep State Off at the Knees

There’s Little Reason To be Optimistic About Trump and Privacy, by Lucy Steigerwald

Donald Trump is probably not going to be known as the president who rescued the Fourth Amendment. From Lucy Steigerwald at antiwar.com:

It’s still impossible to know what president-elect Donald Trump will do. His statements over the past 18 months, and before, have often contradicted each other on issues as varied as foreign policy and transgender people using the bathroom of their choice.

On one important issue, however, Trump has been depressingly consistent. From all appearances, he does not seem to be a friend of the Fourth Amendment. But then, that puts him into the camp of the vast majority of politicians. In America we’ve managed to do a surprisingly decent job holding onto our First Amendment rights; even our Second Amendment ones have not been trashed in the same manner as our right to privacy. The Fourth Amendment is in perpetual distress thanks to the war on drugs, immigration, and terror. Police, feds, and intelligence agencies are constantly demanding more information about us in order to protect us from terrible things.

The war on drugs deeply wounded the Fourth Amendment. SWAT raids on private homes became commonplace, and continue to this day – sometimes with deadly results. Supreme Court decisions upheld everything from helicopters hovering over property, to busting doors in over marijuana smells and the sounds of movement.

New York City’s infamous Stop and Frisk program detained hundreds of thousands of people over more than a decade. The majority of them were black and Hispanic men, who were also innocent of any crime, even a nonviolent one. This program of so-called Terry Stops was legalized harassment, with a racial disparity in its execution that made the whole thing even less defensible.

To continue reading; There’s Little Reason To be Optimistic About Trump and Privacy