Month: July 2019

Here’s What Military-Loving Trump Is Planning For The 4th Of July

Authored by Robert Wenzel via TargetLiberty.com,

How twisted has history gotten?

Independence Day (the Fourth of July) has traditionally commemorated the Declaration of Independence of the United States on July 4, 1776.

The Continental Congress declared that the thirteen American colonies were no longer subject (and subordinate) to the “First” British Empire and were now united, free, and independent states.

Now, apparently, the holiday will be used to put on display the killing machines of the United States.

President Trump said Monday that a display of U.S. military tanks will be part of a special event he is having created for July 4th.

“We’re going to have some tanks stationed outside,” Trump said Monday from the Oval Office.

“You’ve got to be pretty careful with the tanks because the roads have a tendency not to like to carry heavy tanks,” he said. “So we have to put them in certain areas, but we have the brand new Sherman tanks and we have the brand new Abrams tanks.”

(AP notes, that the information challenged Trump has the facts of the military he commands a bit distorted. Sherman tanks were the tank most widely used by the U.S. during World War II, but they have been out of service for decades. The M1A1 Abrams tank is currently the main U.S. battle tank killing machine.)

There will also be a flight of Air Force One over Washington D.C. and a performance by the Navy’s Blue Angels jets, reports The New York Times.

It is not expected that any killings of innocent populous by special forces will be displayed.

Trump, who is to speak at the celebration, has requested that the chiefs for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines stand next to him as aircraft from each of their services fly overhead and their respective hymns play on loudspeakers.

“It’ll be like no other — it’ll be special, and I hope a lot of people come,”. Trump told reporters. “We have some incredible equipment, military equipment, on display — brand-new. And we’re very proud of it.”

Trump is scheduled to deliver his Fourth of July speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, becoming the first president in decades to participate in the annual Independence Day event.

But the Declaration of Independence did not cheer the military might of government, it concerned itself with calling for the overturn of governments that were limiting individuals.

Some snippets:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…

…

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

If Trump wanted to act within the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, he wouldn’t haul out evidence of the US killing machine. He would call troops home on the Fourth of July from posts around the world. He would in the spirit of the Declaration leave people independent around the globe to find their own way.

And on the domestic front, he would close down some of the most oppressive government agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Agency, the National Security Agency, the Transportation Security Administration and the Federal Reserve Bank.

Now that would set off fireworks I would like to see.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2NtaVEw Tyler Durden

California Police Agencies Were Supposed To Make Misconduct Records Public. Why Isn’t It Happening?

California judges ruled earlier this year that a new California law making police misconduct records public is retroactive, so that means law enforcement offices are opening up the file cabinets and sending off photocopies in response to media requests, right?

Ha. No. They’re continuing to fight by trying to charge massive fees, destroying records, and, in some cases, simply not responding. Reporters from four different California media outlets recently combined forces to explain what’s been going on with obstruction efforts against a statewide project where journalists attempt to report on newly available misconduct records.

S.B. 1421, passed in the fall of 2018, requires that California law enforcement agencies start making public records of police conduct in cases where officers fired their weapons, killed or seriously injured somebody, engaged in sexual misconduct, or engaged in dishonest conduct while on the job. These were records that have been kept sealed from the public for decades, per state law, preventing the public from knowing whether police officers in their midst had been abusing their power.

While there were some very promising initial stories at the start of 2019 as S.B. 1421 was formally implemented, things seem to have gone wrong. Seven months later, many law enforcement agencies within California are not releasing the records as state law mandates. Some, like the California Highway Patrol, have not coughed up a single one. From the Los Angeles Times:

Both the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and the Long Beach Police Department have yet to release any records to KPCC, the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register or KQED.

The Los Angeles County Probation Department, which supervises youths held in detention, has declined to release records, claiming disclosure about cases involving minors is prohibited by law. Records from the department, which also supervises adults, could be redacted to remove names of protected individuals.

[Los Angeles Sheriff Alex] Villanueva has refused to search for records, instead demanding that reporters identify specific cases they are seeking. The Sheriff’s Department released records about one deputy to the Los Angeles Times, a handful of separate files to KPCC, but nothing to the Orange County Register.

Villanueva’s office has declined to provide any records to Reason about Villanueva himself. When Villanueva ran for office, he claimed that he had been unfairly targeted by higher-ups at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) for discipline because he had complained about misconduct by leaders. So Reason, under S.B. 1421, requested his discipline records back in January. Initially, the sheriff’s department did not comply because the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs sought an injunction and attempted to argue that S.B. 1421 was not retroactive.

Ultimately, that effort failed and multiple judges across the state ruled that the law is indeed retroactive as the bill’s sponsor, Democratic State Sen. Nancy Skinner, had intended. In March, the LASD informed Reason that our request for Villanueva’s records was being processed.

It’s now July and we’ve gotten nothing. In fact, the LASD’s public records request office is not replying to emails from Reason requesting updates. It looks as though we’re not alone.

Some cities and counties decided that January 2019 was the right time to catch up on housekeeping and have destroyed years of old police records over the past few months. Many have insisted that the timing is just a coincidence. But as the Los Angeles Times notes, many of the records from these offices—like Yuba County’s Sheriff’s Office—had been kept around for much longer than internal guidelines required; it was just after these agencies knew they could be forced to disclose them that such records were destroyed.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2XoWOV9
via IFTTT

House Democrats Sue IRS For Trump Tax Returns

House Democrats have filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to turn over the President Trump’s tax returns, according to the Washington Post, citing a public court filing. 

The House Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Rep. Richard E. Neal (D-MA), filed the lawsuit against the IRS Tuesday morning following a months-long impasse with the Trump administration over the returns. 

The request had been denied several times by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, whose decision to ignore a May subpoena from Neal’s committee was backed by the Justice Department in June after the DOJ advised it. 

Mnuchin’s refusal caused Neal to seek a court battle which legal experts believe may go all the way to the Supreme Court, according to the Post. a

The lawsuit will also sort out a range of oversight questions between the Executive Branch and Congress. 

“This is a big deal that goes to the core of our government’s checks and balances, and could for many years shape the relationship between the executive and legislative branches,” said Steven Rosenthal, a legal expert with the Tax Policy Center. 

House Democrats and legal experts have pointed to a 1924 law that explicitly gives lawmakers the authority to seek the records, but the Trump administration has characterized Neal’s request as a partisan maneuver to embarrass his political opponents. Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s acting chief of staff, has said Democrats will “never” see Trump’s returns. –Washington Post

Responding to Rep. Neal’s April demand for the personal and business returns from 2013 to 2018, Trump said that the law is “100 percent” on his side over his decision not to release the returns, adding that he “absolutely” would once the IRS stops auditing him. 

“Hey, I’m under audit. But that’s up to whoever it is. From what I understand the law is 100 percent on my side,” Trump told reporters. He has told his advisers that he’s willing to take the fight to the Supreme Court, and has publicly argued that since he won the election, his taxes should no longer be of concern. 

The IRS, meanwhile, has stated that audits don’t preclude people from releasing their own tax information. 

Neal’s subpoenas to Mnuchin and IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig requested the IRS turn over Trump’s individual income tax returns, all “administrative files” such as affidavits for those income tax returns, and income tax returns for a number of Trump’s business holdings such as the Donald Trump Revocable Trust, an umbrella entity that controls dozens of other businesses including the Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida. –Washington Post

Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns during the 2016 presidential election is a break from decades of precedent, according to the Post. That said, there’s never been a billionaire in the White House. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2FNZdOj Tyler Durden

California Police Agencies Were Supposed To Make Misconduct Records Public. Why Isn’t It Happening?

California judges ruled earlier this year that a new California law making police misconduct records public is retroactive, so that means law enforcement offices are opening up the file cabinets and sending off photocopies in response to media requests, right?

Ha. No. They’re continuing to fight by trying to charge massive fees, destroying records, and, in some cases, simply not responding. Reporters from four different California media outlets recently combined forces to explain what’s been going on with obstruction efforts against a statewide project where journalists attempt to report on newly available misconduct records.

S.B. 1421, passed in the fall of 2018, requires that California law enforcement agencies start making public records of police conduct in cases where officers fired their weapons, killed or seriously injured somebody, engaged in sexual misconduct, or engaged in dishonest conduct while on the job. These were records that have been kept sealed from the public for decades, per state law, preventing the public from knowing whether police officers in their midst had been abusing their power.

While there were some very promising initial stories at the start of 2019 as S.B. 1421 was formally implemented, things seem to have gone wrong. Seven months later, many law enforcement agencies within California are not releasing the records as state law mandates. Some, like the California Highway Patrol, have not coughed up a single one. From the Los Angeles Times:

Both the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and the Long Beach Police Department have yet to release any records to KPCC, the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register or KQED.

The Los Angeles County Probation Department, which supervises youths held in detention, has declined to release records, claiming disclosure about cases involving minors is prohibited by law. Records from the department, which also supervises adults, could be redacted to remove names of protected individuals.

[Los Angeles Sheriff Alex] Villanueva has refused to search for records, instead demanding that reporters identify specific cases they are seeking. The Sheriff’s Department released records about one deputy to the Los Angeles Times, a handful of separate files to KPCC, but nothing to the Orange County Register.

Villanueva’s office has declined to provide any records to Reason about Villanueva himself. When Villanueva ran for office, he claimed that he had been unfairly targeted by higher-ups at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) for discipline because he had complained about misconduct by leaders. So Reason, under S.B. 1421, requested his discipline records back in January. Initially, the sheriff’s department did not comply because the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs sought an injunction and attempted to argue that S.B. 1421 was not retroactive.

Ultimately, that effort failed and multiple judges across the state ruled that the law is indeed retroactive as the bill’s sponsor, Democratic State Sen. Nancy Skinner, had intended. In March, the LASD informed Reason that our request for Villanueva’s records was being processed.

It’s now July and we’ve gotten nothing. In fact, the LASD’s public records request office is not replying to emails from Reason requesting updates. It looks as though we’re not alone.

Some cities and counties decided that January 2019 was the right time to catch up on housekeeping and have destroyed years of old police records over the past few months. Many have insisted that the timing is just a coincidence. But as the Los Angeles Times notes, many of the records from these offices—like Yuba County’s Sheriff’s Office—had been kept around for much longer than internal guidelines required; it was just after these agencies knew they could be forced to disclose them that such records were destroyed.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2XoWOV9
via IFTTT

Synagogues Conducting Active Shooter Drills, Martial Arts Training Following Poway Attack

In the wake of two synagogue shootings over the last eight months, Jewish congregations across the country have been actively preparing for more violence.

In May we reported on “Tactical Rabbi” Raziel Cohen, a firearms instructor who told the Westside Los Angeles Chabad congregation in the wake of the Poway, California synagogue shooting that left one dead: “We don’t want to be victims,” adding “We need to protect ourselves now.” 

“The benefit of having an individual in the synagogue with a gun is that they’re fighting for something,” said Cohen, adding “They’re much more willing to defend their kids than a person who is being paid $15 an hour.“

Meanwhile, congregations across the country are conducting active shooter drills according to the Times of Israel. 

After a span of eight months that included shootings at two synagogues, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Poway, California, congregations across the country are actively drilling their members on how to act if terror arrives at their doorstep. Some, like Beth Hillel-Beth El, have run active shooter scenarios during services. Others have detailed plans in place should a shooting occur. Others have trained a group of congregants in how to fight gunmen when they come through the door. –Times of Israel

“It was not a high-energy, kind of catching people off-guard kind of thing,” said Rabbi Neil Cooper of Temple Beth Hillel-Beth El in Wynnewood, PA, of a recent active shooter drill “We also wanted to let people know, more than anything else, that we’re on top of this. We have a procedure. We have people looking out.“

Active shooter drills and Tactical Rabbi aside, congregations across the country are employing a “range of other security measures” according to the Times, which include “locking doors, reinforcing windows and hiring armed security,” while “Some congregations have encouraged members to carry handguns at services, while others have installed new restrictions on carrying guns in synagogue.” 

Krav Maga – the Israeli military’s close-quarter martial art, is also being taught in synagogues now. 

Avi Abraham, a Krav Maga instructor who teaches self-defense classes to synagogue-goers, shows how to combat an attacker in a promotional video. (YouTube screenshot)

Avi Abraham, an Israeli martial arts expert who teaches Krav Maga, the Israeli hand-to-hand combat system, has taught self-defense courses to groups at more than 20 synagogues in the New York City area. His course consists of six hourlong classes for groups of congregants where they learn how to take down a shooter. He also offers the option of drilling the technique during services. The program costs $1,500 to $2,000.

Abraham teaches the groups how to collectively pounce on an attacker from the side as he’s entering a doorway, then to tackle him and take his weapon. He said the technique depends more on “sechel,” or good sense, than on physical strength. Those who aren’t fighting, Abraham said, should lie on the ground so as to be out of the line of fire. –Times of Israel

“People very rarely rise to the occasion,” during a mass shooting, according to Michael Masters, executive director of the Secure Community Network, an umbrella organization that provides guidance to Jewish institutions on security procedures. “They fall back to their level of training. Our goal is to give people a plan in their minds so that if an event happens, they have a toolbox they can draw from effectively.” 

The active shooter trainings often follow the mantra of “run, hide, fight,” which means to choose one of those three options and commit to it — either running to a safe place, hiding somewhere secure or fighting the gunman. As the congregants at Beth Hillel-Beth El filed through an exit at the front of the sanctuary, opposite the doors, ushers locked the main entrance and triggered a silent alarm to the police.

The trainings complement active shooter drills that have been taking place for years at schools, including Jewish ones. Beth Hillel-Beth El’s preschool has been running active shooter drills since at least 2013. Because the kids range from infants to kindergartners, sometimes keeping them quiet during the drill means hugging them or giving them lollipops. –Times of Israel

In Salt Lake City, Utah, the Kol Ami liberal synagogue was given a security briefing by the Utah Highway Patrol. While it did not include an active shooter drill, Rabbi Samuel Spector told the Times that it made people feel more at ease. 

“People were saying, ‘Okay, now I’m thinking about what my escape route would be,” said Spector, adding “If I’m here, could I throw my siddur [prayer book] at the person? I think that a lot of people, at least that night, started to think about their plan.” 

“This is not business as usual,” said Rabbi Neil Cooper. “We just cannot do it like that anymore. We live in a world where it no longer can be assumed that things are safe, as unsettling as it might be. We have to run services in the world in which we’re living and praying.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2FKr3eA Tyler Durden

VP Pence Recalled To White House For “Unknown Situation”; Airforce 2 Diverted

Update: The Office of the VP has clarified that Pence wasn’t recalled to Washington for an “emergency”, but to deal with an undisclosed “situation.”

Though the language is less ominous, but only slightly.

* * *

Vice President Mike Pence has been called back to the White House on Tuesday because of an undisclosed “emergency,” NBC 10 Boston reports.

Pence had been scheduled to land in Manchester around 11:25 am, but instead, just before he was due to land, news broke that his event had been cancelled and that he would be heading back to Washington instead of making an appearance in New Hampshire to discuss the opioid crisis.

Air Force 2 was reportedly diverted due to the emergency. No further information was immediately available.

Whatever the emergency, it can’t be good.

 

 

 

 

 

 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2KS7yEX Tyler Durden

The Economic Bubble Bath

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

At the end of a long, tiring day, we may choose to treat ourselves to a soothing bubble bath. Surrounded by steaming water and a froth of sweet-smelling bubbles, it’s easy to forget the cares of everyday life.

This fact is equally true of economic bubbles. When the markets are up, we’re inclined to feel as though life is rosy. Unfortunately, it does seem to be the norm that investors fail to recognize when a healthy up-market transforms into a dangerous bubble. We tend to be soothed into overlooking the fact that we’re in hot water, and economically, that’s not an advantageous situation to be in.

Periodically, any economy will experience bubbles. It’s bound to happen. Human nature dictates that, if the value of an asset is on the rise, the more success it experiences, the more we want to get in on the success.

Sadly, the great majority of investors have a tendency to fail to educate themselves on how markets work. It’s easier to just trust their broker. Unfortunately, our broker doesn’t make his living through our success; he makes it through brokering transactions. The more buys he can encourage us to make, the more commissions he enjoys.

It’s been said that a broker is “someone who invests your money until it’s gone,” and there’s a great deal of truth in that assessment.

And so, we can expect to continue to witness periodic bubbles in the markets. They’ll occur roughly as often as it takes for us to forget the devastation of the last one and we once again dive in, only to be sheared once again.

But we’re presently seeing an economic anomaly – a host of bubbles, inflating dramatically at the same time.

The Stock Market Bubble

Only a decade ago, stocks plummeted and billions were lost by investors. But then, before the system could be cleansed of the detritus, more money was artificially pumped into the system and stocks began to rise again.

Margin debt is now at an all-time high and complacency is at a maximum. The present condition looks quite a bit more like 1929 than 2008, and the stock market is overdue for a crash. This time, it promises to be much greater than before, as the debt that’s fueling the bull market is at a level that’s historically unprecedented.

Back in 1929, communications were poor and stock market trades were recorded in handwritten ledgers. Today, the recording is entirely electronic, and in addition, in order to minimize losses, the investor may have his broker set electronic stops that will ensure that a given stock is offered on the market automatically, if it drops below the stop price.

This works quite well as long as times are good, but, if there were to be a crash, what it means is that, even if a crash were to be triggered in the middle of the night, when everyone is asleep, the market would awake in the morning to a sudden collapse, as prices blew through the stops of countless investors.

Therefore, the collapse would be much swifter and much more severe than in 1929.

The Bond Market Bubble

This bubble could just as easily be termed a “debt bubble,” as bonds are simply a promise to pay a debt at a future date. (It’s important to note that the bond market consists of a far higher level of investment than the stock market and therefore has the potential to do far more damage in a crash.)

Bonds may be issued by companies, municipalities or central governments. By far, the largest portion of the bond market is that of Treasuries, or government-issued bonds.

Since 1944, the US has been in the catbird seat in the world, as its dollar has been the world’s default currency. But, as the US has, in recent decades, increasingly abused that privilege, the rest of the world has been looking for ways to extricate itself from this economic stranglehold.

With the introduction of new central banks in Asia, plus the new CIPS system (an alternative to the monopolistic SWIFT), it’s become increasingly possible for the East to wean itself from the dollar. Increasingly, this has meant dumping US Treasuries back into the system.

Bonds are presently in a bubble of epic proportions, and with every month, the foundation underneath them is crumbling more, due to ever-increasing dumping.

Even the perma-conservative Alan Greenspan now states that, “We are in a bond market bubble… Prices are too high… The bond market bubble will eventually be the critical issue.”

The Real Estate Bubble

In 1999, the Fed, then under Alan Greenspan, convinced the US president to repeal the Glass Steagall Act, freeing the banks to create the types of loans that helped cause the Great Depression. This, of course, led to the real estate crash of 2007, but instead of the banks going belly-up, they were rewarded for their misdeeds through bailouts that were paid for by taxpayers.

Consequently, although there was a significant correction in real estate prices, this didn’t result in prices dropping to fair value.

They have once again risen and, at this point, are overdue for a major correction. That correction is now well under way. Since it has begun at a time when other markets are also in peril, the level of bailout required for all of them at the same time is impossible to achieve.

Had each of these markets been allowed to collapse in the normal manner, as would occur in a free-market system, they would have done so at levels below the present ones and would have done less damage when they burst. Additionally, each bubble would have burst at its own, logical time.

Instead, all are being propped up artificially, far beyond their natural sell-by date.

For this reason, they’re so over-inflated that, when one bubble is popped, it’s all but certain that they’ll all go down together.

And so, effectively, the financial world is in a bubble bath. The investor is surrounded by soothing bubbles, each of which is rising, reassuring him that his investments are growing.

Although it should be clear to him that he’s in hot water, the majority of investors are holding on to their bonds, rubbing their hands over the rising sale prices of homes in their neighbourhood and considering taking out a loan to buy more stocks on margin.

The collapse will therefore come to most as a complete surprise.

Economic bubbles are normal. They’re created by the lack of forethought that’s common to human nature.

But the present bubble bath is an anomaly without precedent and, as such, promises to result in a crash of unprecedented proportions.

*  *  *

Excessive money printing and misguided economic ideas have created all kinds of bubbles. All signs point to this trend continuing until it reaches a crisis… one unlike anything we’ve seen before. That’s exactly why Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video that explains how and why this is happening… and what comes next. Click here to watch it now so you can be prepared.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2RPB26Z Tyler Durden

Give Nuclear Freeze a Chance

President Donald Trump’s unprecedented visit to North Korean soil was followed Sunday by a New York Times report that his administration is seriously considering a “nuclear freeze” deal. The Times described the concept—which, if implemented, would have far more lasting ramifications than Trump’s much-analyzed jaunt across the demilitarized zone (DMZ)—as one which “essentially enshrine[s] the status quo,” permitting Kim Jong Un to retain the nuclear arsenal he has now and receive some sanctions relief in exchange for a moratorium on all future nuclear weapons development.

By Monday morning, National Security Advisor John Bolton, the proposal’s chief opponent according to the Times, had flatly denied the report on Twitter. “I read this NYT story with curiosity,” Bolton tweeted. “Neither the NSC staff nor I have discussed or heard of any desire to ‘settle for a nuclear freeze by NK,'” he continued, closing with a conspiratorial allegation that the article is “a reprehensible attempt by someone to box in the President,” plus a vague call for “consequences.”

In many White Houses, this denial might be the final word on the administration’s perspective, but this mercurial administration eludes that interpretation. The president’s approach to North Korea often seems to differ from Bolton’s absolutist tack, and his stated preference for opaque messaging in foreign policy could also be in play. Contra Bolton, the freeze deal may indeed be on the table—and so it should be.

Pursuing this plan is not, as interventionist hardliners like Bolton might claim, an exercise in appeasement for a hideously brutal regime. It is a prudent recognition of reality which could serve as a key step toward peace on the Korean Peninsula and, in time, greater liberty and prosperity for the North Korean people.

And it is those two ends, more than denuclearization itself, which should be Washington’s goals for realistic engagement with Pyongyang. This becomes obvious if we recognize three facts: First, Kim will not willingly denuclearize so long as he considers nukes necessary to regime survival. Second, war to relieve Kim of his weapons would be disastrous even with a quick nominal victory, causing enormous civilian suffering and economic disruption that would take decades to repair. Third, opening North Korea to international trade and cultural influences may be its people’s best shot at freedom and comparative normalcy.

Evidence for the first fact abounds in both Pyongyang’s behavior and words: Kim sees his nuclear weapons as the sole effective insurance available against U.S.-orchestrated regime change. “History proves that powerful nuclear deterrence serves as the strongest treasure sword for frustrating outsiders’ aggression,” his government has argued, explicitly pointing to U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya as proof that the risk it perceives is real. Trump’s selection of Bolton—a longstanding advocate of forcible regime change in North Korea and elsewhere—can only exacerbate this suspicion. 

Polling shows three in four Americans already realize Pyongyang is unlikely to denuclearize any time soon, and Washington would do well to catch up. Insisting on complete denuclearization ensures stalemate in U.S.-North Korea relations at best. At worst, it will usher us into a devastating war. The hardline position is a reckless step toward avoidable conflict.

And the plausible outcome of such a war is undeniable. Though Kim could never pose an existential threat to the United States, he could and would wreak enormous anguish once attacked. If a U.S. offensive makes Kim’s retention of power inconceivable, there is every reason to anticipate a response of indiscriminate destruction. Pyongyang could easily use its nuclear, chemical, biological, and conventional weapons to inflict unspeakable damage on civilian populations in Seoul—a city of 25 million people, just 35 miles from the North Korean border—to say nothing of U.S. military members, their families, and their South Korean allies near the DMZ. Close quarters on the peninsula guarantee mass casualties in the initial battle, to say nothing of the permanent guerilla warfare, nation-building, and occupation that would follow, if recent U.S. interventions elsewhere are any guide.

Though we might hope a North Korea freed from Kim’s oppression would promptly become a modern, healthy society, those hopes would probably go unfulfilled for years. The effects of life in a murderous prison state cannot go away overnight, and what we know of Pyongyang’s exhaustive brainwashing apparatus suggests U.S. invasion would not be immediately welcomed by many. While far from ideal—no one of good conscience wishes for Kim to remain in power for even a single second longer—the slower and more peaceful approach of integrating North Korea into the global economy is our best chance at improving ordinary North Koreans’ quality of life. It may even empower them to demand the political change they desperately need and deserve.

Prioritizing peace and progress for the North Korean people instead of making a maximal denuclearization demand may entail an intermediary deal like the one in the Times‘ Sunday report. The good news is it just might work. 

Backed by the indefinite deterrence assured by America’s unparalleled military might, what this gradual strategy of local-led diplomacy and international trade lacks in naïve simplicity it makes up for by offering a real shot at success.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2JiqDwN
via IFTTT

Give Nuclear Freeze a Chance

President Donald Trump’s unprecedented visit to North Korean soil was followed Sunday by a New York Times report that his administration is seriously considering a “nuclear freeze” deal. The Times described the concept—which, if implemented, would have far more lasting ramifications than Trump’s much-analyzed jaunt across the demilitarized zone (DMZ)—as one which “essentially enshrine[s] the status quo,” permitting Kim Jong Un to retain the nuclear arsenal he has now and receive some sanctions relief in exchange for a moratorium on all future nuclear weapons development.

By Monday morning, National Security Advisor John Bolton, the proposal’s chief opponent according to the Times, had flatly denied the report on Twitter. “I read this NYT story with curiosity,” Bolton tweeted. “Neither the NSC staff nor I have discussed or heard of any desire to ‘settle for a nuclear freeze by NK,'” he continued, closing with a conspiratorial allegation that the article is “a reprehensible attempt by someone to box in the President,” plus a vague call for “consequences.”

In many White Houses, this denial might be the final word on the administration’s perspective, but this mercurial administration eludes that interpretation. The president’s approach to North Korea often seems to differ from Bolton’s absolutist tack, and his stated preference for opaque messaging in foreign policy could also be in play. Contra Bolton, the freeze deal may indeed be on the table—and so it should be.

Pursuing this plan is not, as interventionist hardliners like Bolton might claim, an exercise in appeasement for a hideously brutal regime. It is a prudent recognition of reality which could serve as a key step toward peace on the Korean Peninsula and, in time, greater liberty and prosperity for the North Korean people.

And it is those two ends, more than denuclearization itself, which should be Washington’s goals for realistic engagement with Pyongyang. This becomes obvious if we recognize three facts: First, Kim will not willingly denuclearize so long as he considers nukes necessary to regime survival. Second, war to relieve Kim of his weapons would be disastrous even with a quick nominal victory, causing enormous civilian suffering and economic disruption that would take decades to repair. Third, opening North Korea to international trade and cultural influences may be its people’s best shot at freedom and comparative normalcy.

Evidence for the first fact abounds in both Pyongyang’s behavior and words: Kim sees his nuclear weapons as the sole effective insurance available against U.S.-orchestrated regime change. “History proves that powerful nuclear deterrence serves as the strongest treasure sword for frustrating outsiders’ aggression,” his government has argued, explicitly pointing to U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya as proof that the risk it perceives is real. Trump’s selection of Bolton—a longstanding advocate of forcible regime change in North Korea and elsewhere—can only exacerbate this suspicion. 

Polling shows three in four Americans already realize Pyongyang is unlikely to denuclearize any time soon, and Washington would do well to catch up. Insisting on complete denuclearization ensures stalemate in U.S.-North Korea relations at best. At worst, it will usher us into a devastating war. The hardline position is a reckless step toward avoidable conflict.

And the plausible outcome of such a war is undeniable. Though Kim could never pose an existential threat to the United States, he could and would wreak enormous anguish once attacked. If a U.S. offensive makes Kim’s retention of power inconceivable, there is every reason to anticipate a response of indiscriminate destruction. Pyongyang could easily use its nuclear, chemical, biological, and conventional weapons to inflict unspeakable damage on civilian populations in Seoul—a city of 25 million people, just 35 miles from the North Korean border—to say nothing of U.S. military members, their families, and their South Korean allies near the DMZ. Close quarters on the peninsula guarantee mass casualties in the initial battle, to say nothing of the permanent guerilla warfare, nation-building, and occupation that would follow, if recent U.S. interventions elsewhere are any guide.

Though we might hope a North Korea freed from Kim’s oppression would promptly become a modern, healthy society, those hopes would probably go unfulfilled for years. The effects of life in a murderous prison state cannot go away overnight, and what we know of Pyongyang’s exhaustive brainwashing apparatus suggests U.S. invasion would not be immediately welcomed by many. While far from ideal—no one of good conscience wishes for Kim to remain in power for even a single second longer—the slower and more peaceful approach of integrating North Korea into the global economy is our best chance at improving ordinary North Koreans’ quality of life. It may even empower them to demand the political change they desperately need and deserve.

Prioritizing peace and progress for the North Korean people instead of making a maximal denuclearization demand may entail an intermediary deal like the one in the Times‘ Sunday report. The good news is it just might work. 

Backed by the indefinite deterrence assured by America’s unparalleled military might, what this gradual strategy of local-led diplomacy and international trade lacks in naïve simplicity it makes up for by offering a real shot at success.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2JiqDwN
via IFTTT

IMF’s Uber-Dove Lagarde Rumored To Replace Mario Draghi As ECB President

After failing to push through her pick to succeed Jean-Claude Juncker at the helm of the European Commission, ‘lame duck’ German Chancellor Angela Merkel is instead proposing a more palatable pick to succeed Mario Draghi at the ECB.

Virtually guaranteeing that the Draghi-era stimulus will only accelerate, Merkel and several other officials involved in the selection process have settled on IMF head Christine Lagarde. BBG described Lagarde’s candidacy as “one of the key pieces in the latest slate of candidates for the EU’s top jobs which leaders, lawmakers and parties have been wrangling over since Sunday.”

It’s fair to assume that Lagarde would kick the central bank’s money-printing into high gear. Though she has on occasion expressed skepticim, she has also praised the PBOC and its untrammeled stimulus.

More recently, during an interview with CNBC back in April, Lagarde warned that the global economy is mired in a “delicate moment” and that Trump’s trade wars are responsible for these problems. This was around the time the IMF issued its latest slashed forecasts for global growth.

With so many investors, banks, businesses ad others desperately hoping that the world’s central banks will keep the economic expansion alive, instead of deliberately killing it.

Though they recently feuded over Merkel’s plan to install Franz Timmermans as the European  Commission’s next president, apparently, the leaders of the eurozone’s two largest economies have reached a compromise to fill the two most important bloc-level jobs, including  Draghi’s soon to be vacant post.

German defense minister Ursula von der Leyen is emerging as the latest frontrunner to lead the commission after eastern member states and the EPP, Europe’s center-right political party, objected to a package floated over the weekend that would have seen Dutch socialist Frans Timmermans take that post.

Officials in Berlin say that Chancellor Angela Merkel is a fan of Lagarde and she would enjoy widespread support from among the governing Christian Democrats. The combination of Lagarde and Von der Leyen however was proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron in a conversation with Merkel on Monday night, an EU official said.

Of course, under the European tradition of filling these jobs by horse-trading, Lagarde’s candidacy must be accepted by all parties alongside the nominees to the four other key  bloc-level posts. Fortunately, Lagarde reportedly enjoys wide-ranging support among the center-right and center-left  in the EU Parliament.

Lagarde

Given her embrace of aggressive stimulus, Lagarde’s appeal is expected to be broad as most bloc leaders are hoping to save Europe from the brink of yet another recessionary slip. That’s something Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann, a notorious hawk, should keep in mind: Now’s not the time for ‘normalization’. And after Mario Draghi’s latest “whatever it takes” moment, whoever leads the central bank next will be under tremendous pressure to maintain the status quo.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YrxgTN Tyler Durden