Showing posts with label Kim Strassel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kim Strassel. Show all posts

Friday, May 15, 2020

WSJ's 'Deep State' Conspiracy Buffoons Flail While Trying To Defend Barr Interfering In Flynn Case


"Ummmm....let's see, what more dopey crap can I write as a proper cockroach on the Wall Street Journal's op-ed staff? Oh yeah, let me go after Mueller, Emmet Sullivan and unmasking Flynn again!"

"Trump and his followers have been routinely advocating the jailing of Trump's political opponents without an investigation, criminal charges, trial or conviction by a jury of their peers. This is the way fascist dictators dispose of their political opposition."=    Lucian K. Truscott IV, smirkingchimp.com 


The hysteria about Michael Flynn and his "unmasking"  - displayed openly in the WSJ's op-ed pages the past week -  provides a graphic insight into full blown collective madness. (So one can grasp why all these WSJ op-ed stooges are likely on opioids or MJ candy). Start off with Dan Henninger ('The Flynn Debuachery', May 14, p. A13)   who insists "a low grade mistake by Mr. Flynn got built into a high stakes prosecution."  Not so!

In fact, the report from the FBI interview, known as the FBI 302, showed clearly Flynn was not coerced in any way, and further was given every chance to take an honorable out.   To that end during the interview the agents gave Flynn every opportunity to come clean, even parroting back his own words to try to jog his memory. But Flynn insisted on lying about his conversations with the Russian ambassador Kislyak - regarding U.S. sanctions and a UN vote.  Giiven the FBI had intercepts of the phone conversations the FBI couldn't help but notice they conflicted with the public account. 

What's more, the statement filed at the time of Flynn's guilty plea showed Flynn coordinated the substance of his calls to Kislyak with a senior member of the Trump transition team.  A collusion no brainer, hell a conspiracy no brainer.

To jog our own memories, let's recall the Flynn case grew out of phone calls he made to Sergey Kislyak in the final days of 2016, asking that Moscow please refrain from retaliating after the Obama administration imposed sanctions on Russia for interfering in the election.  The conversations were captured on routine wiretaps of Kislyak and triggered concern among FBI agents investigating Flynn once they learned of them.

And despite all the hubbub about "unmasking" the poor Flynn, or Carter Page, let's please get a grip. In reality.  According to the WSJ's main news section piece on it yesterday (p. A3, 'Unmasking Requests Released') :

"Unmasking U.S. identities in intelligence reports occurs thousands of times annually, according to statistics maintained by the Office of the Director Of National Intelligence."

Henninger like his deranged WSJ colleagues: Kim Strassel ('The Mueller Coverup',  May 8, p. A13), and Holman Jenkins Jr. ('What The FBI Is Covering Up', p. A13, May 13)   as well as the WSJ editors ('The Flynn Unmaskers, Unmasked', p. A14, May 14,  'All The Schiff Transcripts', May 14, 'Judge Sullivan's Bad Judgment', May 14)  fairly screeches detachment from the world of facts and realty at every turn.  For example, 'Henny' barking:

"What's striking is the lack of remorse across the Washington establishment. Unapologetic arrogance on this scale suggests that unmaskings, intelligence abuses and leaks are likely to return as off the books weapons against individuals disliked by the government bureaucracies."

Oh, you mean shifty traitors like Flynn who tried to make side deals with the Russkies before Obama's term had even ended? That who you mean, Henny?


Let's remind ourselves here, given the chaos of Trump World, that Flynn’s case grew out of phone calls he made to Sergey Kislyak in the final days of 2016, asking that Moscow refrain from retaliating after the Obama administration imposed sanctions on Russia as punishment for interfering in the election. The conversations were captured on routine wiretaps of Kislyak and prompted concern among the F.B.I. agents  once they learned of them.  Agents then began to suspect that Flynn was lying to other Trump officials about the phone calls and were concerned that he was a blackmail risk because Russia knew the truth of the calls

Henny's hysteria over unmasking (like that of the WSJ editors, and Holman Jenkins)  might also have been allayed or diminished had he taken the time to read the main news page story about unmasking (p. A3, same date).  Therein he'd have seen quotations on its importance from Michael Morrell - former acting director of the CIA:

"You can't do your job without it."  

Adding that he used to make unmasking requests several times a month. Missed by these nattering WSJ nabobs too is that unmasking would be a veritable requirement once conversations had also been intercepted by foreign intelligence sources, like the GCHQ in the UK. 

Meanwhile, 'deep state'  fetishist Kim Strassel,   having wallowed in her own form of  conspiracy paranoia (cited earlier),  is outraged that the FBI entered on the basis of Flynn "engaging in conversations with Russian government officials" like it's just a day at the office.  She even expresses passing umbrage at the potential invocation of the Logan Act of 1799, "a law that's never been used to convict an American".   Well, maybe it was never officially needed before, Kim.   She also carps about the "rarely enforced" Foreign Agents Registration Act - as if it's merely on the books for decoration or to fill up space.  But it all falls into place when you see her daft reference to Flynn's "supposed lies".  No, Kim, they were REAL lies, about foreign influence on a top U.S. security asset  - Flynn. 

Today she did herself one better ('Barr vs. The Beltway', p. A15) barking as part of a long, unhinged rant:

"Instead of applauding Barr for divulging these facts, the Beltway has responded with ire. Mr. Barr's transparency threatens to reveal further that the Russia collusion narrative was pure fantasy...to expose how hatred of Donald Trump drove people in power to break rules and destroy norms."

 Jeezus Peace!  The harpy hack is yapping about "people in power" (in the Beltway) "breaking norms and rules" as if on another planet.  So it's little wonder she  appears to forget (perhaps in the same otherworldly MJ haze)  that it was her master Trump who - on July 26, 2016-  openly implored the Russians to hack Hillary's emails. In other words, openly pandering for the commission of the crime that occurred one day later- and set off this whole investigation of Donnie  Bonespurs.  In front of millions, the Orange Turd had baldly blurted:


"I will tell you this, Russia if you're listening, I hope that you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. You will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."

So Trump, in full public view, asked Russia to hack his political opponent. Does Kim recall any of that? Evidently not. She only recalls the "breaking rules and destroying norms" she wants to recall. Or, the minimum needed to continue to peddle her Fusion GPS- Christopher Steele- Hillary- FBI conspiracy bunkum.   

Indeed, when this twaddle about "investigating the investigators"  first surfaced with Barr in December last year, Chris Hayes on All In (Dec. 10) aptly observed:

"The obvious problem with this theory is that it makes no sense. Remember this, during the campaign the only investigation that became public was the one regarding Hillary Clinton, which arguably lost her the election. But the FBI was investigating Trump at the very same time. No one uttered a word about it. If they were so desperate to bring Trump down you'd think someone would have said something.  They didn't. So the whole conspiracy theory doesn't even hold together."

Now let us cut through all the other fulsome crap that Henny, Kim and Little Holman as well as the brain addled Journal editors have tried to hurl on the wall - hoping some sticks. They all appear to forget or ignore the 434-page report issued last year by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz. It concluded the FBI had an “authorized purpose” when it initiated its investigation, known as Crossfire Hurricane, into the Trump campaign. In doing so, Horowitz implicitly rejected GOP assertions that the case was launched out of political animus, or that the FBI broke its own rules on using informants. 

Strassel also lambasted Judge Sullivan in today's rant, declaring he had "decided to join the smear campaign against Mr. Barr."  Actually, Kim, Judge Sullivan opted to be one  of the few to stand up to Barr's effort to smear the rule of law and equal justice in this country. Can ya dig it? Well, perhaps not in that purple haze!  Kim's other favorite target has been Christopher Steele and she defames him in her earlier (5/8)  hack piece as well, blurting in a separate tirade therein:

"Colleagues of author Christopher Steele had warned the FBI of his poor judgment."

I suspect Kim dredged this tidbit up in the same opioid or MJ haze. that excited her ire against Judge Emmet Sullivan.   But skewering her B.S. is a Financial Times account (Feb. 16, 2018) , that Steele was the "UK intelligence expert on Russia".  It is, therefore, highly unlikely he'd be "fooled" by any kind of false intel or disinformation as Strassel seems to believe. Or that his judgment was in any way impaired or unsound. Indeed, James Nixey, the head of Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia program, informed the AP that sections of the dossier document created by Steele "read exactly as reports from the secret services".

Then there are the sad and sorry WSJ editors ('Judge Sullivan's Bad Judgment', yesterday) who are enraged that someone with principle would not kowtow to Trump's toady Barr. How dare Emmet Sullivan intervene when prosecutors said there was no crime!   But Sullivan wasn't buying that recycled offal, and could smell a rat from a mile away when Barr intervened and did Trump's dirty work for him.  Effectively trying to pardon Flynn so Trump wouldn't look bad doing it just before an election.  Nice handoff if you can get it.  

To justify its stupid stance the WSJ editors merely parrot Barr's codswallop that "Flynn's statements weren't criminal because the interview lacked any investigative legal basis".  But it did and in spades, as numerous legal specialists (nearly 1,800 at last count) have pointed out.  

The Journal's top twits had to also know that Flynn displayed a serious consciousness of his own guilt. He damned well knew what he was trying to set up with Kislyak was wrong and close to treason, however you cut it. (That Logan Act again!) Flynn  himself pleaded guilty twice to lying to investigators as part of a larger inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election - and this was even after agents practically parroted his own original words back to him!

Heading into the sentencing hearing, Flynn was trying to have it both ways—obtaining credit for cooperation and acceptance of responsibility in hopes of a sentence of probation, while minimizing his own wrongdoing. Judge Sullivan would have none of it. He elicited from Flynn the admission that he knew it was a crime to lie to the FBI and his desire to proceed to sentencing rather than withdraw his guilty plea.  Sullivan also spent much of the hearing
expressing his “disgust” and “disdain” for Flynn’s criminal conduct, saying that Flynn had “arguably sold [his] country out,” at one point even accusing Flynn of treason. 

The Journal's goofballs can whine and cry all they want about Judge Sullivan's "bad judgment" but in fact it was fully justified after Barr's stunt.  Given Barr and the DOJ are now "in bed" with Flynn, it makes eminent sense for Sullivan to enlist a third party to help determine how to navigate the legal morass Barr has created.  After all,  a level of judicial integrity and independence is at stake here, even if the WSJ's Trump minions can't see it, or acknowledge it.   Thankfully, Judge Sullivan   appointed  John Gleeson to oppose the Justice Department’s  nonsense.

The position will be as a kind of legal adviser to Sullivan, to wade through the reams of B.S. hurled into the pot by Barr and the DOJ. It is also certain to thrust Mr. Gleeson into an open confrontation with the bombastic baby in the WH and his dog whistle hostages, i.e. supporters.   But  make no mistake, Gleeson - as a former mob prosecutor - will be able to handle whatever Dotard  barks out, even threats.

In the meantime, there is a method behind all this WSJ op ed madness: that is, the roaches incessantly hurling  out their detritus are setting the table for a  bogus claim to go after Obama and his whole "deep state" administration.  So they hope that while the public is focusing on this distraction it will minimize Trump's colossal fail at handling the pandemic.  Already, indeed, we hear and see the Dotard threatening the  jailing of Joe Biden and of Obama himself, as David Plouffe noted last night on 'All In'.  This in a cynical effort to create an "Obamagate" meme and likely October surprise. 

No, folks, as I wrote many times before, you can't make this shit up.  This is the political and health crisis we are in, and all we can hope to do is survive until we can get this Maggot out in November.  In the meantime he will depend on his lapdogs, including FOX, the WSJ op-ed hacks,  Barr, and now Lindsey Graham (who promises an Obama-ite investigation) to run interference for him by throwing up endless distracting smokescreens.

See also:
by P.M. Carpenter | May 15, 2020 - 6:17am | permalink
 

by Amanda Marcotte | May 15, 2020 - 7:27am | permalink

AND:


And:

The United States is a country to be pitied































Friday, April 24, 2020

Terrified Of "Statism" - Skinflint GOP Prefers 26 Million Americans Go Back To Work Prematurely Rather Than Get More $$$


"Diabetes almost killed me two years ago, but if it comes down to insulin- or food for my kids - I'm getting food for my kids. Those kids are gonna get meals until Dad is laying in the ground." - Stressed, jobless worker this a.m. on CBS.

"I just want everyone to know I am not against the medical providers fighting this virus.  But at the same time there isn't enough financial assistance from the government to pay rent or buy food."  - A bystander (interviewed last night on NBC News), watching a Virginia protest against a state lockdown

"Those who are agitating to reopen everything are knowingly or unknowingly doing the bidding of conservative groups tied to Republican megadonors and the White House, all of whom want us all back to work so they can start making money again. They don’t care about us. They never, ever have.


"If social distancing is lifted before a national testing regimen has been undertaken, before a free vaccine for everyone is as available as fast food, COVID-19 will come back again and again until the precious economy these industrialists want us to die for will be nothing but dust and ashes." - William Rivers Pitt, 'Governor Kemp Is Lubricating the Economic Machine With His Constituents Blood'

 "All of us are being stalked by this virus, and though some of us may see poetic justice in the likelihood that lots of these "protesters" will likely be dead or dying of it in a month because of their belligerent bullshit, we surely know that they have put the rest of us at risk, too.  So, you bet your sweet ass it could be worse. Plan for it. As the saying goes, hope for the best; prepare for the worst. Get your affairs in order. It's entirely possible you won't be here to celebrate the 4th of July, nor be able to thank all those patriots who were so willing to sacrifice your life for their "freedom."  - Could It Be Worse? Fuckin' A!  - Jaime McNeill, smirkingchmp.com

If perverse conservative opinion -  such as we see in the WSJ (e.g.'Paying Americans Not To Work', April 23, p. A14) - becomes the norm in dictating new legislation, we can expect not one more cent will be enabled for the 26 million Americans now unemployed.  This follows the latest job report (WSJ, today, 'Jobless Claims Swell By 4.4 Million', p. A1) that showed an additional 4.4 million workers  - out of work from the shutdown - have now filed claims.

This is amidst an antiquated unemployment insurance system, literally creaking from decades-old software and slow speeds, not designed to meet such demand.  This is why many of the newly unemployed are sometimes having to call their state offices up to 50 times a day to try to file, too many with zero results.  As we learn from the WSJ "regular" (not op-ed) pages ('State Funds for Jobless Drained', April 21, p. A6):

"States have struggled to process an unprecedented number of claims applications.  States also face added coronavirus-related spending while shutdowns of much of the economy - along with delays in income tax filings- have threatened to crimp state budget revenues."

Further, we learn (ibid.):

"No state has run out of money but state officials are already planning for the possibility".

The takeaway?  According to most economists, the states could run out of money in the coming weeks for paying regular unemployment benefits.  The rational solution in this time of crisis would be for a new federal rescue spending package to replenish state trust funds to pay the unemployment claims.

I mean, you only need to check in with the nightly news to see how many Americans are struggling to even make basic payments, and for whom the $1200 "stimulus" just barely pays the rent and maybe the water bill and a few groceries. One guy interviewed on ABC two nights ago said his check was going to barely cover his overdrawn account at his bank.

And what "solutions" do we find from the skinflint GOP who'd rather give massive support to the corporations than workers? Well, nothing but cheapo, ridiculous proposals.  For example, instead of the states getting any more money from the gov't they can instead apply for  "interest free loans from the Treasury".  This advice from Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia.  (Misbegotten for sure, but not as nutso as Mitch McConnell's proposal that all the Democratically-governed states just "declare bankruptcy" - instead of "getting another  blue state bailout".  Of course this would be unconstitutional and violate the Contracts Clause.)

The loan thingie, of course, has been beaten to death the past few weeks. Recall last month WSJ contributor John Cochrane ('How to Treat the Financial Symptoms of COVID-19')   had this to say on the superiority of loans:

"Loans are better than gifts. Rather than give each of us $1,000, allow us to borrow a fraction of last year's income from the Internal Revenue Service  and repay it when we file our taxes."

So the BK, Target or KFC worker has to go cap in hand to the IRS to beg for a $10,000 loan to pay back when he has to file taxes in 2021?  When he already will likely be in hock for back rent, utilities, etc?  But this kind of "let 'em suck air"  thinking pervades the reactionary Wall Street Journal op-ed pages.(E.g. March 18, ('The Fiscal Stimulus Panic', p. A16):

"The checks no doubt will be popular....but they won't come cheap, running at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars for the first round.  What happens if the pandemic lasts into the summer?  The clamor will be for another round and then another."

Well, uh yeah! DUH! Because people ordered to stay locked down, no work, no paychecks coming in, will still need some moola to buy food, pay off utility bills etc. How hard is this to get into your noggins?  


Then we also see, on April 21, the advice from Peter J. Wallison ('Americans Need Forbearance Not More Stimulus', p. A16)  that the solution is simple. The mass of jobless folks, as well as small businesses struggling. ought to just take care of their priorities (like food) and pay off other debts and obligations later. Just cite the need for "forbearance" to any creditors.   Well, good luck with that!

We've also beheld other crackpot, skinflint suggestions from these cheapskates like workers ought to raid their 401(k)s for extra money to live on.  Ask the IRS to think of it as a loan or ask congress critters to beg the  IRS to suspend any tax penalties.

Another choice proposal is to "suspend the payroll tax", the latest iteration of that nonsense appearing four days ago (WSJ, 'Suspend The Payroll Tax', by Steve Forbes and Arthur Laffer, p. A17).  These two bozos argue -  presumably while not on opioids or MJ candy- that the objection that this will drain the Social Security and Medicare Trust funds is misplaced.  According to this dense duo:

"The Treasury will just transfer money from the general fund, fully making up the shortfall."

Right, and pigs fly and Capuchin monkeys speak Chinese.  Let's remind ourselves here that both of these clowns for years have pumped the bollocks that no Social Security Trust funds actually exist, nor are the T-bonds to back those Trust funds real. 

Given all of this austerity codswallop one is led to ask what is driving this incredible parsimonious  conservo attitude to the plight of millions, struggling to feed themselves and keep a roof over their heads.   Janice's  response as usual is brusque and to the point, e.g. "They were all born cruel, with cruel DNA and a brutal, hateful nature!"   Well, maybe. It certainly explains a  lot,  such as the cynical. nasty attitude displayed in yesterday's WSJ editorial ('Paying Americans Not To Work').  The overriding concern in that piece is not that millions may not be able to keep a roof over their heads, or food on the table, but rather that given the increase of $600 / week federal bonus in unemployment insurance, "Why would anyone take a pay cut and go back to work?"

I.e. so when the bonus expires on July 31, too few 'Muricans would be willing to go back for a $416 a week job, say if they can hold out for a further extension in the bonus benefits. Blithely ignoring that millions of higher wage workers would be taking a pay cut - even with the $600 weekly "bonus". But see, these cranks think like this because they are ensconced in their own little ivory tower condos, gated community apartments or high rises, so have absolutely no idea of what it's like to be an ordinary wage earner now stuck with mounting bills and too little money to pay them, as well as get food. 

Interestingly, another fiscal "Scrooge", Kim Strassel  ('Congress' Coronavirus Mess', p. A13, WSJ today),  wasn't too thrilled that all the Dems know how to do is "spend, spend, spend".  The WSJ witch then cited Kurt Huffman, the owner of ChefStable,  who insisted he "can't get his employees back on the job" - in the wake of the last CARES package and its enhanced unemployment benefits.  Perhaps a more pressing issue is how he expects to get reluctant customers back into his place.  I suppose he might use the tactic discussed on CBS this morning:  have all customers sign a waiver form, then if they get the COVID-19 they disavow filing any lawsuits. I.e. admit they were too dumb to attend to state lockdowns.

This is the other side of the cruelty coin:  to deny the gravity of the pandemic while preventing more money reaching Americans trying to survive. The goal? To attempt to crank up the pressure for them to demand to return to work early, never mind the risks.  Or the polls that now show the "silent majority" of Americans (not the yahoos shouting and flouting lockdown rules) would not go out to eat, to the cinema or any other things - even if the economy opened up fully.  (48 percent in a recent NBC poll indicated no inclination to leave their homes until the outbreak is over, or a vaccine is available. Well, that's a long time!)

 Never mind, the game of the GOP and conservative skinflints is to try to ratchet up the economic and political pressure to get the millions of unemployed to take to the streets - just like the loud, knuckledragging Trumpie buffoons. The ones who've had to be stopped in their tracks by the unsung, overworked medical heroes, e.g.
Image may contain: 1 person, car and outdoor
 Doing their level best to get the low IQ screamers and apes off the streets and back into their homes.  (Incredibly, to see how inflated the Right's rhetoric can be, Steve Forbes - the nut proposing the payroll tax cuts- compared these protesting losers to Rosa Parks - who refused to give up her seat to a white cracker on an Alabama bus. The total failure of any analog is, of course, lost on Forbes - who was not long ago denied a seat on the Federal Reserve on account of his abysmal lack of knowledge, experience.)  To quote economist Paul Krugman ('The Right Sends In The Quacks')

"Moore's a quack with a long history of inventing facts to support his ideological agenda."

Well, we already saw that earlier when I pointed out his balderdash that  it's no problem to raid the payroll tax.  The Treasury will just "replace the shortfall".  Well, not in any Republican administration, that's for damned sure!

  But again, as we watch these scenes play out on TV news it is always well to bear in mind that these protesters are only a loud minority, nowhere near a majority. But the cynical GOP Scrooges are betting they can shut off the government money spigots long enough so that more citizens will crack and take to the streets to demand businesses open, jobs return. Putting their own welfare- and their families' - on the backburner.

This is clearly the bet of another WSJ  hack, Dan Henninger (April 23, p. A13, 'How We'll Live With Coronavirus')  who insists:

"Millions of years of human behavior are going to overwhelm the state lockdowns"

Clearly betting that eventually, i.e. when no more money gets into citizens' accounts, the rest of the 26 million will crack and join the Trumpie protests and push for reopening. Never mind it risks a second wave which could shut things down much much longer.   The biggest lie spouted by Henninger, after he admits flattening the curve was achieved to an extent - via the lockdowns - is:

"That suppression strategy accomplished its goal. Hospital capacity is returning in most major cities."

But don't believe it. Hospital capacity is still literally overflowing or at the margins of doing so. It would only take another wave - say from premature reopening - to overrun the system. Hell, don't take my word for it. But do pay attention to Trauma nurse Amy Pacholk,  from Stony Brook University Hospital, New York:

"All I keep hearing is that the curve is flattening, the curve is flattening. That may be true but all the ICUs are still full. The sickest are still there. People are waiting to be intubated.  We're full and we can't handle anything more. We can't open this country. If you want to live you stay home. My God,  don't open up this country. It needs to be closed until at least June."

The message for Americans is not to be caught in the trap being laid by the GOP's skinflint brigade: whether politicos, FOX blowhards  or WSJ pundits.   Citizens (sane ones)  ought to be especially terrified given the downward spiral in response to the pandemic after Trump removed Nancy Messonnier from her CDC post, i.e. as head of the coronavirus response. Why did he do it? Because she chose to level with the American people and told them to "expect significant disruption to their lives from severe illness."  That was back on Feb. 28th .  Dotard was enraged because this scientist was messing up his PR bullshit happy talk, and trail of lies to get re-elected.  Not only was she removed from her post but all independent CDC briefings were halted, and Drs. Fauci and Birx were forced to become part of Trump's daily Moron rally - passed off as "briefings" to the hoi polloi.

 Who did Trump's top asswit at HHS (Alex Azar)  replaced Dr. Messonnier with? Well, Brian Harrison, former head of 'Dallas Labradoodles" - a dog breeding outfit. The twit has no medical education, and from all accounts fits Janice's profile of somebody who got a degree in dog poop collection.   Be afraid, be very afraid. These are the morons we have running the pandemic response.  You should not believe a word any of them say, and also any justification they try to invoke -including the "need" to halt any more "bailouts" (transl. Essential monies for people to feed their kids, pay their bills.) 

Put pressure instead on congress critters- especially the quartet of Repuke Senators still pushing for more austerity in any future bills - to try to make it so the struggling citizens can't meet their basic needs. These four punks are more terrified of "statism" . Conveniently the same 4 anti -bailout "heroes"  were named in that WSJ editorial:

Lindsey Graham (SC)

Ben Sasse (Nebraska)

Tim Scott (SC)

Rick Scott (Florida)

Want to do something? Get their telephone numbers from a congressional directory and blitz them into passing another CARES act that delivers more money  - not in interest free loans- to those who desperately need it.  How much more $$$ ought to go out in the next relief package? Given the next rent payment for those locked down is due May 1st, and the previous $1200 is already spent,  I'd say at least another $2400 per each adult.  This is no time to go cheap, or to appeal for Americans to take on more personal debt and hope for creditors' 'forbearance'.  We are in a "war" as Mnuchin puts it, and we need war-scale deficit spending on a level earlier used for WWII.  In an earlier post, I predicted that $6 trillion -odd bucks will be needed to get through this crisis, and I haven't budged from that! 

 The fiscal hawks  and austerity freaks need to suck it up and stop whining about "statism" and "expanding government".  Now is when Americans desperately need that government, as they did in the 1930s.

See also:



And:

And:


And: