The View from Right Field

Did the FBI “Spy” On the Trump Campaign – And Was It Justified?

Before Attorney General William Barr releases the redacted report from Special Counsel William Mueller on Thursday, let me comment on the furor he caused last week when he told a Senate committee that he was going to have the Justice Department investigate whether the “spying” by the Justice Department on the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign was, in his words, “adequately predicated.”  Attorney General Barr said, “I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal,” and he said he wants to make sure there was a legitimate reason for it.

A number of Democrats went ballistic.  Even though Attorney General Barr merely said he was going to have the Justice Department investigate whether there was an adequate basis for the surveillance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said “the chief law enforcement officer of our country is going off the rails.”  The head of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, said that Attorney General Barr’s comments struck “another destructive blow to our democratic institutions.”

Does this Really Disqualify Joe Biden?

Joe Biden is thinking about running for president.  In fact, he recently just about announced, apparently by mistake, that he is running for president.  But, as he has been getting ready to announce, he has been hit with a number of complaints from women about the somewhat weird things he has done in the past.  One woman, who I think was a Bernie Sanders supporter in 2016, said the former Vice President came up and smelled her hair and kissed her on the back of the head.  Other women have said similar things.  Clearly, former Vice President Biden hasn’t had a good understanding of personal space and the things you should and should not do.  But, so far, the complaints have been about things he did in public, things that were a little creepy and not what people do today, but that’s about it.

Still, it appears a fair number of people, in theory on his side of the political spectrum, think these things should disqualify Joe Biden from running for president. 

Is MMT the Answer to Our Problems?

The new big thing, well, one of the new big things, in the intersection of politics and economics is something called Modern Monetary Theory or MMT.  One of the big proponents of MMT is Stephanie Kelton, an economics professor at Stony Brook University.  This excerpt from Monday’s Wall Street Journal explains the idea:

“Ms. Kelton argues the government doesn’t need to worry so much about how much it borrows to pay for spending programs.  Unlike a household or business, it can never run out of money.  The government can always print money to pay for debts.  The constraint, according to MMT, isn’t the deficit, but whether the borrowing and spending spurs inflation and disrupts economic activity.

With inflation and interest rates now very low, the government has plenty of room to borrow and spend more, MMT advocates say.  The notion has gained traction among Democratic presidential hopefuls, helping to fuel ambitious policy proposals.

If 2016 Was the “Presidential Election from He**,” What Will 2020 Be?

Actually, the question may be “Isn’t 2020 That Way Already?”  It seems pretty clear that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee – if he decides to run, but back to that in a moment.  First, the Democrats.

The Democratic contest seems to be a race to see who can get as close as possible to Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, who would, based on publicity levels in the MSM, have the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination wrapped up by now if not for a group of old white men in Philadelphia in 1787 who set the minimum age for president at 35.¹  On the other hand, we wouldn’t have Ms. AOC to kick us around if those same old white men had set the same age, i.e., 30, for the House of Representatives as they did for the Senate.² 

Yet Another Shutdown Post

The shutdown is getting to be silly.  But, as Janan Ganesh said in today’s Financial Times, it is continuing because “[n]either party values its own objective as much as it values the denial of the other side’s.” 

The problem, however, is not how long this shutdown will last, but how long the next one will last.  Because given the attitude of President Trump and his supporters on one side and Congressional Democrats and their supporters on the other side, there will be another one, if not more than one.  Perhaps September 30, when the federal government’s fiscal year ends.  Maybe some time before that if the national debt limit needs to be raised or if something needs to be done and one side or the other thinks it can turn it into a battle it can win.

The shutdowns will keep happening – until enough of us get mad enough at both sides that they finally understand we care more about government operating, and government employees getting paid, than we do stopping the other side from getting what it wants.  Unless we would rather the government shutdown and government employees not get paid if that is what it takes to stop the other side from getting what it wants.

A Few More Comments on the Stupid Shutdown

A few comments on the federal government shutdown, though I am not sure they add all that much to what I wrote back on January 3.  In any case, it is all the news, so here goes.

1. As I understand the shutdown, it boils down to this:  President Trump thinks that it is better to have a government shutdown than it is to not build the wall he wants to build.  The Democrats in Congress, on the other hand, think it is better to have a government shutdown than it is to let President Trump build the wall he wants to build.  Or, at least, that is how they are acting.

Comments on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Investigation

A few comments on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, not in any particular order.

1.  First, I have no idea when Mr. Mueller will be completing his investigation and/or issuing a report. While there have been reports in the press that it might be soon, nobody knows – or at least nobody who is talking about it in the media knows.

2.  While the original impetus for Mr. Mueller’s investigation was the alleged collusion between Russia, or Russians of one sort or another, and the Trump campaign,1 what has come out of the investigation so far does not have anything to do with that question. Obviously, nobody knows what might be coming or will be in the final report, but while we have seen some things involving Russia/Russians, we haven’t seen anything about collusion between Russia/Russians and the Trump campaign.

Shutdowns and Walls. How Will It End?

Cutting through all of the tweets, press conferences, and claims of outrage, the current partial government shutdown boils down to a simple problem.  President Trump would rather have a partial government shutdown than approve spending bills that do not include money for his “wall.”  He has promised his supporters that he would build a wall.  It was one of the main themes of his campaign, and he hasn’t been able to get it done.  From his viewpoint, he needs to do it.  He promised.

Democrats, on the other hand, would rather have a partial government shutdown than approve money to build President Trump’s wall.  They have pretty much promised their supporters that they will never approve money for a wall.  They feel they need to keep their promise.  Plus, they don’t want to give President Trump the political victory of getting money for his wall.

Election Results In the Age of Trump

The main thing we can say about the results yesterday is something we could have said before the election: Divisiveness and partisanship will increase next year, and political consultants will get even richer.  Six months from now, everybody will look back on the last two years as the good old days of peace and calm (except political consultants – see the prior sentence).

While neither side in the tweet- and spending-fest that ended on Tuesday focused on it very much, the 115th Congress actually accomplished some important things.  The Democrats didn’t like them, but Congress passed a tax reform bill, finally increased defense spending, and beat back a number of late-term Obama administration regulations via the previously little-used Congressional Review Act.   Not to mention the judges Mitch McConnell got through the Senate.¹

Where Does the Republican Party Go After Donald Trump?

While Donald Trump has only been president for a little over a year and a half (it seems longer, doesn't it?), with the 2020 election starting in January of next year (assuming it hasn't started already), it is perhaps not too early to start looking at the question in the title this post, since it could happen in a little more than two years.¹

In an editorial (“What has become of the Republican Party?”) and a long article (“How the elephant got its Trump”) back in April, The Economist touched on this question.  One of the most interesting points in the article was that Trump supporters came to the Republican Party before President Trump did.  Donald Trump didn’t create the populist wing (or whatever you want to call it) of the Republican Party.  He merely took advantage of it.