Salsman: Fiscal-Monetary ‘Stimulus’ is Depressive
Writes Richard Salsman in The Hill: on why Fiscal-monetary ‘stimulus’ is depressive (26 May 2020):What is the case for “stimulus”? Many economists believe public spending and money issuance create wealth or purchasing power. Not so. Our only means of obtaining real goods and services is from wealth creation — production. Under barter no one comes to market expecting to buy stuff without also offering stuff. A monetary economy does not alter this key principle.[…]To see why “stimulus” truly depresses, consult the basics. The creation of public money and public debt is not the creation of wealth; it is not food, clothing, shelter, energy or the like. Even privately generated money and debt, which reflect the needs of trade and lengthy production chains, represent, facilitate and circulate wealth but are not themselves wealth. Meanwhile, the savings borrowed by governments are unavailable to productive enterprises, and when a government creates fiat money beyond what money holders demand, the money loses purchasing power, which boosts the cost of living. These are not roads to prosperity.
Legal Challenges to the Lockdowns
From Pacific Legal Foundation:Napa, California; May 27, 2020: Faced with an imminent legal challenge from a local retail art gallery, Napa County officials said late yesterday that retail art galleries may open for business as part of California’s Stage 2 reopening plan.Quent and Linda Cordair sought to reopen their gallery, Quent Cordair Fine Art, using social distancing, masks, and limiting the number of customers. But Napa County ordered them to remain closed and threatened the Cordairs and their landlord with fines if they reopened ahead of California’s reopening plan. The state’s reopening plan classifies retail businesses Stage 2, while art galleries are Stage 3.The Cordairs sent a letter to Napa County, urging them to treat the gallery like other retail business and to allow them to reopen with other Stage 2 retail stores, but the county never responded.After attorneys from Pacific Legal Foundation informed the county of an impending lawsuit from the Cordairs, county officials responded that retail art galleries would be considered Stage 2 retail businesses and that they may resume operations.“We are delighted that Quent and Linda Cordair may now open their business,” said Anastasia Boden, senior attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation. “It was deeply unfair that the state considered art galleries Stage 3 when the Cordairs’ shop is no different than the dozens of retail stores permitted to open now. While the government can regulate to protect public health, laws cannot be arbitrary.”As a result of the county’s announcement, the Cordairs are no longer moving forward with their planned lawsuit.“We are happy that we can sell our art to willing customers, with recommended safety protocols in place,” said Linda Cordair. “But we shouldn’t have to go through all this trouble to get permission. We should be able to pursue our passion, earn a living, and serve our customers without having to threaten legal action.”Elan Journo interviews Anastasia Boden, Pacific Legal Foundation’s senior attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, and Steve Simpson a legal scholar with the Ayn Rand Institute:
Steven Kates: Why Your Grandfather’s Economics Was Better Than Yours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIgkbdT5V6wSteven Kates presents the Ludwig von Mises Memorial Lecture at the 2010 Austrian Scholars Conference.Pick The Man, Pin The Crime: The Saga of Michael Flynn
In an address given eighty years ago by the then-Attorney General of the United States, Robert H. Jackson made these prophetic words:If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is this realm in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.” [Robert H. Jackson, “The Federal Prosecutor” April 1, 1940.]Given documents released as a result of the independent review ordered by Attorney General William Barr, that this is what happened to Michael Flynn.According to Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, Flynn was railroaded in what liberal law professor, “galling and grotesque” and an “utter travesty of justice.”According to Turley:
Or, in Robert H. Jackson’s prophetic words: “With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone.”Not only has the 1799 Logan Act, never been used to convict anyone, but it has been repeatedly violated:The new documents also explore how the Justice Department could get Flynn to admit breaking the Logan Act [(18 U.S.C. §953)], a law that dates back to from 1799 which makes it a crime for a citizen to intervene in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. It has never been used to convict a citizen and is widely viewed as flagrantly unconstitutional. [Jonathan Turley “Michael Flynn case should be dismissed to preserve justice“, The Hill, 30 April 2020.]Previously undisclosed documents in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn offer us a chilling blueprint on how top FBI officials not only sought to entrap the former White House aide but sought to do so on such blatantly unconstitutional and manufactured grounds.[…]
In modern times, many prominent individuals—like Jesse Jackson, Danny Glover, Sean Penn, Dennis Rodman, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry–have violated the act, some repeatedly. Even if the act could be applied to many private individuals, it makes no sense to apply it to an appointee of an incoming administration whose duties include speaking with representatives of foreign governments. In fact, the motion to dismiss admits that “the Logan Act would be difficult to prosecute.” [John G. Malcolm Zack Smith Hans von Spakovsky, “Michael Flynn Seems to Finally Be Getting the Justice He Deserves“, The National Interest, 8 May 2020]Even worse, it appears McCabe, Strzok, Comey, and various “FBI officials also lied and acted in arguably criminal or unethical ways, but all escaped without charges” according to Turley:
McCabe had a supervisory role in the Flynn prosecution. He was then later found by the Justice Department inspector general to have repeatedly lied to investigators. While his case was referred for criminal charges, McCabe was fired but never charged. Strzok was also fired for his misconduct in the investigation. Comey intentionally leaked FBI material, including potentially classified information but was never charged. Another FBI agent responsible for the secret warrants used for the Russia investigation had falsified evidence to maintain the investigation. He is still not indicted. The disconnect of these cases with the treatment of Flynn is galling and grotesque.[…]Mueller had ignored the view of the investigators and coerced Flynn to plead to a crime he did not commit to gain damaging testimony against Trump and his associates that Flynn did not have.Let us recall Jackson’s words again “It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.”I expect the twists and turns in the Flynn case will eventually make its way into a blockbuster movie — I can see Rob Lowe easily playing Michael Flynn, but in the meantime for a breakdown of the Flynn saga, read “Michael Flynn Seems to Finally Be Getting the Justice He Deserves” and “Michael Flynn case should be dismissed to preserve justice.”
Salsman: Impeach America’s Autocratic Governors For Abuse of Power
Writes Richard Salsman in The Capitalism Standard on “Pandemic = DEM Panic” (21 April 2020):New Jersey autocratic Governor Phil Murphy was asked recently by Tucker Carlson what possible alternative authority warranted his policies, which brazenly violate the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. While grinning and chuckling, Murphy said “I wasn’t thinking of the Bill of Rights when we did this. That’s above my pay grade.” In fact, the Bill of Rights includes a mere ten amendments, and ten lies above Murphy’s IQ. Every governor – indeed, every elected official in America – takes office with a solemn oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of United States,” as amended, and both the supremacy clause and 14th Amendment of that charter prohibit any provision of any state constitution or policy to contradict, defy, or flout the Constitution in any way, at any time, under any circumstances.America’s autocratic governors ought to be summarily recalled, impeached, and if necessary jailed for abusing power. Some Americans in some states are beginning to assemble and protest autocratic policies, but it may be far too little, too late.