Home » Roundup

Comments

Roundup — 13 Comments

  1. From the debt downgrade link: “”I’m not sure if this is really a serious remark, to downgrade the debt,” he said. “Everyone knows that if you buy a US Treasury bill, you can be assured you will be paid back.”

    Yun said that while there are, at times, US government shutdowns or political games played, there is seldom real panic about US debt.”

    Well, that statement will always be true — until it isn’t. This seems to me to be the biggest news item in this round-up and I’m surprised I haven’t read more about it today.

  2. The CNN headlines on the Fitch debt downgrade:

    “Fitch’s downgrade is unlikely to hurt Treasuries’ status as a safe asset. Here’s why”

    “Janet Yellen lambasts Fitch’s downgrade of US debt”

    “JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon calls US credit downgrade “ridiculous””

    “What’s the point of credit rating firms?”

    “The US government securities market is “too big to fail””

    “Bank of America abandons US recession forecast”

    “Surprise! Treasury yields aren’t doing much of anything after downgrade”

    “ADP: The US private sector added 324,000 jobs last month”

    And, lastly: “How economists are reacting to the downgrade”:

    “This is completely absurd,” tweeted economist Jason Furman.

    “I am very puzzled by many aspects of this announcement, as well as by the timing … Overall, this announcement is much more likely to be dismissed than have a lasting disruptive impact on the US economy and markets,” wrote Mohamed El-Erian.

    Calling the decision “off base,” Mark Zandi wrote: “Ask global investors whose bonds they would rather own if push comes to shove in the global economy – it’s those of the U.S. Treasury.”

    “It doesn’t make sense even on their own stated criteria,” wrote Paul Krugman. “There’s surely a story behind this — but whatever it is, it’s a story about Fitch, not about U.S. solvency.”

    Former US Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers, tweeted that “The United States faces serious long-run fiscal challenges. But the decision of a credit rating agency today, as the economy looks stronger than expected, to downgrade the United States is bizarre and inept.”

    I guess we can all go to sleep tonight knowing all is well with the U.S. economy.

  3. The credit downgrade is one of the few things that has a chance of reining some of this stuff in. A lot of connected people stand to lose a lot of money, and they may demand changes. What ends up happening is far from guaranteed to do much good for conservatives or middle-class people generally, unfortunately.

  4. oh mark zandi is the chip dillard of economists, if you raise borrowing costs to the point where the debt swallows up the entire budget,
    a smaller circumstance, occasioned by the interest rate spike of 99-01, let to the argentine debt default, which lead to the kirschner reign,

    ot the son of the last radical (liberal) party candidate was shakiras manager,

  5. Barely a minute into it and had to stop that video. It is infuriating, in the context of the recent Trump indictment, of course.

  6. (4) In the Trump J6 indictment. Professor Jacobson asks, “Where is the crime?”

    There is no crime of just conspiring.

    For better or worse, politicians are allowed to lie. That’s not a crime. Maybe a reason not to vote for them, but it’s not a crime.

    I would say distinguish between political wrongs and criminal wrongs. It would be perfectly within someone’s right to say, I don’t like the fact that he was lying about these things. That’s a perfectly good reason not to vote for somebody. But that doesn’t mean it’s a crime.

    There is that tape when he talks about finding new votes and finding more votes. But I think a reasonable interpretation of that is … make sure all of the votes have been counted…Telling a state official you need to do your job better is not illegal.

    Yet.
    For the Democrats, it is no longer a question of convicting someone of committing a crime, but of creating a crime out of whatever you can get a jury to convict them for.

    From the Trump pleads guilty thread:

    David on August 3, 2023 at 7:37 pm said:
    “Show me the man and I will find the crime. A famous person said that.”

  7. Commenters at LI noted a couple of interesting things, which I will treat severally:

    2smartforlibs | August 3, 2023 at 2:53 pm
    It would appear the crime is Jack Smith withholding exculpatory evidence.

    I take that to be a reference to this story:
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernard-kerik-donald-trump-records-may-not-have-been-reviewed-by-special-counsel/

    Special counsel Jack Smith’s office may not have fully reviewed thousands of pages of records turned over by former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik before seeking an indictment of former President Donald Trump Tuesday, says Kerik’s attorney, Tim Parlatore.

    The documents were submitted to Smith on July 23, according to emails reviewed by CBS News. A source close to Kerik’s legal team said at the time that they believed the records, which include sworn affidavits from people raising concerns about the integrity of the 2020 presidential contest, show there was a genuine effort to investigate claims of voter fraud in the last election.

    In an Aug. 2 email to Parlatore, reviewed by CBS News, a special counsel’s office prosecutor requested “responsive documents as to which the Trump campaign is no longer asserting a privilege,” referring to the Kerik records Parlatore said he previously provided.

    Parlatore said he was “stunned” when, after the indictment came down, the prosecutor contacted him asking for the records he said he had already provided. Parlatore said the “records are absolutely exculpatory.”

    “They bear directly on the essential element of whether Rudy Giuliani, and therefore Donald Trump, knew that their claims of election fraud were false,” Parlatore said. “Good-faith reliance upon claims of fraud, even if they later turn out to be false, is very different from pushing fraud claims that you know to be false at the time.”

  8. LI commenter:

    Aarradin | August 3, 2023 at 9:10 pm
    The riot didn’t disrupt the Senate either – the Senate’s proceedings were halted and the floor cleared as a result of the pipe-bomber (that FBI still hasn’t identified). Pipe bombs found a block or so away at both the R and D HQ’s in DC.

    This was well before the protest got out of hand.

    Is this true? It’s been so long ago, I’ve forgotten the complete timeline.
    I do remember that the vaunted intelligence community that could later identify all of the capitol gawkers so they can be sent to the gulag was totally clueless about the pipe bomb perps.

    The Secret Service gave better excuses for their inability to identify the cocaine pusher at the White House.

  9. LI commenter sfharding points to “George Parry’s excellent article in The American Spectator” which hits Neo’s video at #5 as well as #4.

    https://spectator.org/trumps-third-indictment-is-ludicrous/

    Under the brave new theory of criminal liability set forth in the election conspiracy indictment of former President Donald Trump, former Vice President Al Gore and the members, advisers, and lawyers of his 2000 presidential campaign belong in prison. The same goes for actor Martin Sheen and other Hollywood celebrities for their actions in the wake of the 2016 election.

    To put it mildly, this indictment stretches the law of conspiracy to the breaking point and beyond. It effectively criminalizes constitutionally protected political discourse and election challenges.

    Finally, Trump is charged with one substantive count of obstructing the proceedings of the Electoral College on Jan. 6. This is despite the fact that he has not been charged with instigating the Capitol Hill riot that delayed the electoral vote count.

    So where does this lead, and what does it portend? If this legal theory is allowed to stand, then a politically partisan prosecutor could criminally charge anyone mounting a future election challenge. All it would take would be for the prosecutor to allege that the challenge was undertaken in bad faith.

    The danger to free speech and the chilling effect on the willingness of candidates to seek public office can’t be overstated. The damage to our already onerous politics and electioneering would be incalculable.

    Consider, for example, the 2000 presidential election and the Supreme Court case of Bush v. Gore. Recall that the election’s outcome hinged on the narrow margin of victory in Florida. In that case, candidate Al Gore refused to concede the election and demanded a recount limited to heavily Democrat counties in Florida. It was anticipated that this would find additional votes for Gore.

    From a legal, ethical, and commonsense standpoint, Gore’s proposal was utterly dishonest and unfair. He and his lawyers had to have known that what they were advocating was underhanded and fraudulent. Nevertheless, in and out of court, they kept fighting for this one-sided recount until the Supreme Court mandated a statewide recount in all counties that included Republican as well as Democrat strongholds.

    So, under the theory of the Trump indictment, wouldn’t Gore and his team be criminally prosecuted?

    Similarly, recall that in the wake of the 2016 election, actor Martin Sheen and other celebrities appeared in television ads urging electors from states carried by Trump not to vote for him in the Electoral College. Applying the Trump indictment’s legal standards, shouldn’t these celebrities be prosecuted for conspiring to deprive Trump’s supporters of the right to have their votes counted?

    These are but two examples of where the expansive legal theory underlying the charges against Trump can take us.

    Given the ludicrous and outrageous nature of the indictment, I expect that Trump’s legal team will promptly move to dismiss the charges for failure to state an offense. That will set in motion years of litigation and appeals. But, even if Trump ultimately prevails in having the charges dismissed, the political and financial damage will have been done.

    For, in our system of criminal justice, the process is the punishment.

    That last maxim seems to be trending lately.

  10. Hey, maybe there should be some indictments for this:
    “Top Health Officials Wage War Against NyQuil Chicken”—
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/08/04/nyquil-chicken.aspx
    Key grafs:
    By early to mid-April 2020, critical care doctors had already figured out that the antiparasitic drug ivermectin was working against the novel coronavirus, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration chose to warn people away from the drug instead;
    ‘ Internal FDA emails obtained by Motherboard through a Freedom of Information Act request reveal agency officials were thrilled with the success of its derogatory “horse paste” tweet that went viral at the end of August 2021;
    ‘ The FDA’s tweet linked to a consumer update page about “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19,” which falsely insinuated that ivermectin was “not approved or authorized” by the FDA
    ;
    ‘ While the FDA had not approved ivermectin specifically for COVID-19, the drug has, in fact, been approved for human use since 1987, and has an excellent safety profile. Moreover, doctors can legally prescribe ANY approved drug for off-label use, as was the case with ivermectin….’
    [All Emphasis mine; Barry M.]

    Something like, “NIH, FDA, CDC AGAINST the American People”.
    Conspiracy, anyone?

  11. OMG! Please, please tell me that the Democrats are not so stupid as to put Newsome in the WH!!! I know the 2024 election is already rigged–but, I have to hope they will be smarter than this–a little smarter than their Kamala move.
    IMHO I believe they will push Tester from MT to the top of the list. Read about him here at his website: https://www.tester.senate.gov He pushes all the right buttons: Military, agriculture, Mexican citizenship, queers, conservation, and importantly he is up for re-election this year. He is big in stature (like Trump) and has one wife and a ranch. In other words, he is Mr Clean in their book and so I prepare your readers to expect this guy on the scene soon. Currently he is pushing back against Biden’s Department of Education plan to eliminate school funding for archery and rifle classes. That will carry a lot of weight in some parts of this country. Type in John Tester to your search engine and get the full picture.

  12. Quick Thoughts

    1) ” I hope they debate sitting down, though, or that DeSantis stands on a box. Newsome is 6’3? and DeSantis is supposedly 5?11?.”

    • When I watched the DeSantis/ Crist debate, I noticed that they appeared to be the same height when they shook hands. Crist is 5′ 9″/ 69″. Pretty sure DeSantis is not 5′ 11″.

    • 69″ is the average height for a man in the USA; however, some claim it is a disadvantage for political candidates.

    • In the past there have been questions about whether or not DeSantis was trying to boost his height. Nothing as laughable as some of Gerhard Schroder’ stunts (5′ 8″).

    • I’d encourage him to not do anything that attempts to hide or minimize who he is. Yes, that might be easy for me to say – not short – but some of the most commanding leaders I have known were men of shorter that average stature.

    2) Seems like DeSantis and his wife are going to give the “fleece vest look” a try.

    • That was – and still is – a trademark look for Gov. Youngkin.

    • Would be very surprised if the average voter knew that – not everyone follows politics that closely – but not surprised if some of your readers know that.

    • Youngkin strikes me as an interesting alternative to DeSantis; however, do not think DeSantis has to worry about him announcing his candidacy – and then showing up wearing his fleece vest.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>