Surprised At Unequal Justice?

So Donald Trump was finally sentenced for his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records in New York State. But since he would be inaugurated as President of United States ten days after the sentencing, there would be no consequenses...at all. The sentence of "unconditional release" means no prison time, no probation, no restrictions, no conditions at all. Trump was whining on his social media site Truth Social that this someone meant that he was innocent...just another example of his ignorance on so many fronts. His conviction on these 34 counts (which were really piling on, since each of the counts traced back to the same crime: falsifying records in order to influence voters in the 2016 election - it was a separate count for each ledger entry, each check, each memo) were just one of the indictments. He was indicted by a Georgia State grand jury for his attempt to "find" enough votes to flip the states electoral votes to him. It's unlikely that this case will ever proceed since the prosecutor was banned from continuing with the case. Of the two federal indictments, one was for retaining federal documents and refusing to return them. The judge in the case dismissed the charges on the grounds that the position of Special Counsel was unconstitutional, despite there having been several Special Counsel appointments, at least one of which was confirmed as legal. The other federal indictment was for election interference for his actions not only for inciting the January 6th Insurrection, but for the numerous other actions he took to overturn the election results in 2020 and in January 2021. This case was delayed while the Supreme Court mulled over the concept of presidential immunity. Both the federal cases were effectively moot when Trump was re-elected - Department of Justice policy is such that the president cannot be prosecuted for anything while in office. The delays ran out the clock. 

Anyone who is surprised at this isn't paying attention.

There's several factors involved. His cultish following and compliant judges with novel interpretations of law, certainly. But the fact that someone with a lot of money to spend and/or with powerful connections can avoid or delay consequences for their actions is nothing new. Look at the whole concept of cash bail. In some jurisdictions people accused of crimes spend months, if not years sitting in a jail cell waiting for their trial. Not because this is what happens to everyone, but because many people have no financial resources and cannot afford even the most insignificant level of bail. Many will plead guilty just to get released. Meanwhile they've lost their job and have a criminal conviction on their record and have trouble getting a new job. But if you have a few million or billion in the bank, bail is seldom going to be a problem. 

Access to lawyers is another obstacle to equal justice. How many people who are reading this article have a lawyer? I have used a lawyer a couple of times in my life, but I don't have one in my smartphone contacts (I almost typed "speed dial"). If I was arrested I would need to use my one phone call to call my wife or other family member and ask them to Google "criminal lawyers in Lincoln NE". And I'm not poor. Even so, I would quickly drain my bank and retirement accounts to pay for any kind of defense. This doesn't just apply in criminal cases. Bringing suit in civil court is expensive. An ordinary person trying to sue a big company or a wealthy individual soon finds out how expensive delays can be. This is how people like Trump are able to avoid paying contractors - they don't have the resources to outlast the myriad delaying tactics. The delaying motions don't even have to be reasonable, but unless they're completely frivolous the judge has to consider them, and eventually the plaintiff runs out of money. Of course there is pro bono attorneys and public defenders exist of course, but many of them have such large case loads that they are no match for the gold-plated lawyers that billionaires have on retainer. 

Trump's escape from any consequences for his actions shine a spotlight on a problem with our legal system., but it's not new. And in nine days he will be in charge of the federal law enforcement apparatus, and has promised to use it to go after those he perceives as his enemies. Maybe it's just bluster, crazy talk to gin up support from his rabid base. But is that better? Marginally. 

But just the threat of retribution has inspired some to comply in advance. 

A Distraction, Or Just Batshit Craziness?

There's a lot of opinions going around on what Trump's plans are. Or if there are plans. Whether his talk about acquiring Greenland, Canada and the Panama Canal is real, or just a distraction from some other nefarious scheme. 

There's two streams of politicking going on, and only one has anything to do with Trump. There's no doubt that the Republican Party has become less and less democratic, less genuinely representative, over the last decade or so. It doesn't take too much Googling to uncover plots by Republicans to keep themselves in power in state legislatures even when the majority of voters choose Democrats for statewide office; lawsuits to throw out thousands of votes when it looks like a Democrat will win; frivolous challenges to elections only when Democrats win. Mitch McConnell and his allies have been working on turning the federal judiciary into an arm of the Republican Party for as long as he's been in office. The Republican Party has abandoned any pretense of working for the good of all Americans and his intent on using their hold on power to do two things (1) Further enrich the ultra-wealthy among them and (2) Play upon the ignorance and bigotry of a significant percentage of the electorate to turn back the clock and erase people's hard-won rights. The cabal behind Project 2025 and similar lines of thought see Trump as an easily manipulated vehicle to put their plans into action. They'd be there and pushing their agenda no matter what Republican was in office.

Trump on the other hand cares only about himself. He allies himself with the far right only insofar as it feeds his ego and grows his bank account. Everything that he does is to shine a spotlight on him. He doesn't care about this country or its people. He takes no time to educate himself about the myriad issues that he is entrusted with overseeing. He doesn't even take care to install people with the necessary expertise into positions that affect millions of people here and abroad. His picks for high ranking positions are nothing more than a "screw you" to those he perceives as "enemies within". So does all his talk about annexing other countries, exacting retribution on his political enemies, or slashing one third of the federal budget  mean anything? 

The statements that he's been making are dangerous. They're dangerous if he means it. These other countries aren't going to sit by idly as we try to take them over. What will that do to the system of international alliances? We just got done with an ultimately useless intervention in Afghanistan, does the country want another war? Already? What if it's just talk? On many occasions in his first term and during the last four years Trump made outrageous statements, but then, when challenged about them, he claimed he was "joking", or being sarcastic (think about the whole injecting disinfectant debacle). Is this what we want the president to be doing? Talking nonsense about serious issues? Either way he's going to be doing things that are incredibly disruptive to the country, or he's joking about doing things that are incredibly disruptive to the country. I guess joking is marginally better than carrying them out. 

I've written a lot about Trumpism being a cult. Many people justified their vote for Trump as voting for economic stability, including low prices. He's already abandoned that "promise" and he isn't even in office yet. Some of his advisors are even now backing off the campaign rhetoric about deporting millions of people, "clarifying" that they're prioritizing deporting criminal illegals...which we're already doing. Not to mention expanding programs that will bring in more immigrants to fill jobs that theoretically would go to Americans. He'll break every one of his promises, but his cult will still love him. 

The best that we can hope for is that his mental decline and overall incompetence, paired with Republican Congressional infighting and unseriousness, will result in a four-year gridlock. 

Who Benefits? (Guess)

The other day I had a conversation with a guy who I would characterize as a "sane conservative". What I mean by that term is that he wasn't spouting conspiracy theories or bigoted hatred, just some old school conservative Republican positions regarding government regulation and fiscal responsibility. We were having a civil conversation, agreeing on some things and politely disagreeing on others when he brought up Trump. He mentioned that many in big business were looking forward to Trump being back in office, since he is for getting rid of regulatory overreach and is generally business friendly. I responded that that's a traditional Republican policy position that they could have had with some other Republican instead of  a dementia-ridden, hate-filled, ignorant self-dealing lunatic.  And that's the (or one of the) problems with the heads of large corporations - they're willing to accept the disruption to the economy and the erosion of freedom, the gradual conversion of our democracy to an authoritarian state if it will swell their bank accounts and inflate their stock valuation. 

Regulations have to be balanced. They can't be so restrictive that businesses cannot operate, nor can they be so toothless that businesses will do harm. Regulations often cost money to implement, and costs, any costs, reduce profit. All other things being equal, a business's primary goal is to maximize profit, and anything that stands in the way of that goal is an enemy to be resisted. Fair enough, but government's job isn't to maximize profit, but, at least according to the Constitution, its job is to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty". Government is not in the business of business, its goal is not to be profitable, but to facilitate a society where all can flourish. If that's the socialism or communism that some rail against, your argument isn't with me, it's with the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution. 

Profit-seeking has it's place in a free nation. Profit is the reward and motivation for taking risks. Government will often subsidize research and development for things that are necessary but not profitable, but so many inventions are the result of risk taking. Those who took the financial risks should benefit when their risks pay off, but not at the expense of the "general welfare". Many of our largest and most profitable businesses not only derive their riches from a return on their investment, but on government largess. Most states have incentives programs that reward companies for locating their factories, or data centers or headquarters to their cities. In Nebraska we have a several incentives programs, most which reward companies for doing what they would have done anyway, and are subject to manipulation by smart accountants. In one program we give the owner of a building being restored to historical standards a credit worth 20% of construction costs. Included in construction costs are developer fees, which can be as high as a quarter of total costs. In many cases the building owner is the developer, so they are paying a $1 million effectively to themselves and receiving a $200,000 tax credit for moving $1 million from one ledger to another. Good work if you can get it. The reason most incentives programs exist is because the next state over has them. 

It's becoming abundantly clear, even to the minds addled by MAGA promises, that the only people who will benefit from Trump's second term will be the people who are already rich. People in his inner circle are already floating ideas to increase certain types of immigration, the kind that benefits big business, despite the rhetoric about immigration being bad for America. We've heard much about how the tariffs Trump wants to enact will increase inflation, but surely Trump's billionaire friends will be able to secure waivers. The billionaires will land on their feet no matter what happens. 

And this brings me back to my point about gutting regulations being a traditional Republican position. The difference between the old guard Republicans and Trump is that the old guard understood that balance had to be maintained. They actually listened to economists, and even if they did prioritize their wealthy donors, they understood how everything was interconnected, and certainly understood who paid for tariffs. A Nikki Haley, or even a Ron DeSantis administration would shape up much differently than the upcoming Trump presidency, even if many of the basic policies would be the same. Eliminating regulations and tightening up immigration enforcement would likely still be priorities, but it's doubtful that there would be the threats of retaliation against political opponents or speculation about buying Greenland or taking over the Panama Canal. Yes, both Haley and DeSantis have sucked up to Trump, and DeSantis in particular has attempted to out MAGA Trump in the way he has governed in Florida, but tellingly they both campaigned hard against him in the Republican primaries when they thought there was a chance of taking him down. Despite the proliferation of Trump sycophants in all levels of the Republican Party, a powerless Trump (or a deceased Trump) would restore some semblance of sanity, even if the core goals are largely unchanged. 

Now? We're just dealing with chaos for chaos' sake. 

 

Can "They" Take Away Our Social Security?

Can Trump and Company actually "take away our Social Security"? 

Maybe.

Before we all start screaming "It's my money!" or "I paid into it since I was twelve!" Let's look at some facts.

The money that came out of your paychecks over the years is long gone. It was used to for Social Security benefits for the people who had retired while you were working. You're eligible for benefits when you retire, not because "your" money is in an account somewhere with your name on it, but because an algorithm based on your lifetime earnings record calculated how much your monthly benefit will be.  

It is true that until very recently the amount being paid out in benefits was exceeded by what was collected in payroll taxes, creating a surplus. That surplus is what is called the Social Security Trust Fund (SSTF). Currently the SSTF balance is $2.7 trillion. 

Every year that there has been a surplus it has been invested in "non-marketable government securities". This means that the SSTF isn't a Scrooge McDuck type vault full of money, or even a bank account with deposits equaling $2.7 trillion, but what amounts to $2.7 trillion worth of IOU's that are earning market rate interest. Until recently the balance grew each year as revenue exceeded benefits paid out. Since 2020 benefits have exceeded revenue through payroll deductions, so the SSTF balance has been reduced for the last three years. The deficit has been financed through the redeeming of the  "non-marketable government securities", aka "IOU's", which reduces the SSTF balance and is accounted for in the same way as any other government debt obligation, i.e. it is an expense against the general fund. The SSTF deficit for 2023 was $41 billion. 

A popular myth is that Congress, or various presidents, have "borrowed" from the SSTF in order to fund various tax breaks for the rich or foreign wars. While it is true that investing in the securities provides cash to the general fund, all that transfer accomplishes is to lower the amount of outside borrowing that needs to be done to finance the general fund deficit. Congressional or presidential pet projects are funded the way everything else in the general fund budget is funded, by deficit spending fueled by borrowing. 

A related myth is that Social Security will be "broke" some time in the next decade. It is true that by 2035 the SSTF will be depleted. What that means is, not that there will be no money to pay benefits, but that revenue from payroll deductions of then-current workers will only cover around 83% of benefits to then-retirees. Some action in the next ten years will need to be taken to cover the remaining 17%. 

Congress and the president have several options, increasing the cap after which FICA deductions are no longer assessed is one. A small 1% increase in FICA deduction on both employer and employee is another. Raising the retirement age is an unpopular option. Something needs to be done, sooner rather than later. (As unpopular as it was, Reagan's taxing some Social Security benefits when combined income exceeds a certain level, contributed to extending the life of the program)

Or Congress and the president can simply decide to kill Social Security by refusing to honor the debt obligations from the general fund to the SSTF. This would immediately reduce to zero the SSTF balance, effectively eliminating it and reducing benefits to whatever is brought in via payroll deduction. This would immediately reduce the national debt by $2.7 trillion (the total is currently around $31 trillion) They can change the formula by which benefits are calculated. If they only did it for new retirees, we'd never know - how many people know how their benefits are calculated anyway? Whatever solution, some people's benefits will be less than they would have been if no changes are made. 

It's unlikely that there would be enough support to totally kill Social Security. That doesn't mean that the 2025 crowd won't try. Lower and middle income Americans, the ones who depend at least in part on Social Security are far from the administration's priority. Everybody, including Trump, says they won't touch Social Security, but we've already seen how much a campaign promise from Trump is worth.

So, You're Saying That You Aren't Going To Lower Prices?

A few weeks ago I wrote about "What Will He Do?". I think that even with the inauguration more than a month away, we have some more information on what he will, won't and can't do. He made a lot of promises during his campaign, and we're already seeing some of them go by the wayside and other horribly coming to pass.

One of the processes that are different this time around is way he's putting together his cabinet and other key positions. In 2016 it was obvious that he and his core team had no idea how many slots needed to be filled or what qualifications were required. He ran the selection process like a small town job fair - taking applications and holding interviews, announcing on Twitter who the "finalists" were. (Who can forget the way he humiliated Mitt Romney, dangling Secretary of State and unceremoniously dumping him) This time around he's doing it more like the traditional way: deciding ahead of time who he'd want in various jobs, or sifting through those who expressed interest, then making an offer. A very much behind-the-scenes, opaque methodology. The difference between Trump's transition and an actually normal transition is that for many of these posts their qualifications are an antipathy toward the mission of the agency they have been chosen to lead.  The main qualification, however, is a servile loyalty to Trump himself. There are several nominees that would fit into any Republican administration, Senator Marco Rubio is one example, but even he has transformed from a typical Republican into a Trumpublican over the last eight years. In addition to cabinet picks who want to burn it all down, and traditional types, there are the truly unqualified. Loyalists whose only qualifications is loyalty. There are several potential appointees whose experience consists entirely of being a Fox News host. Even Pete Hegseth, nominated as Defense Secretary, whose qualifications appear to be National Guard officer and Fox News host, has no experience managing a large organization. This would be equivalent to viewing my nine years working for the Nebraska Department of Revenue as sufficient qualification to be Treasury Secretary. Let's not overlook the Attorney General and FBI picks who not only support the January 6th Insurrection and lies about a stolen election, but have made it clear that they plan on investigating, prosecuting and jailing political opponents. 

The biggest clue to what actions Trump will take came this week in the realm of economics. Many people who voted for Trump based their decision primarily on the economy. (Whether that was a rationalization to cover anti-immigrant bigotry or other categories of hatred is another subject). It is inarguable that inflation was high during most of Biden's term, compared to relatively low rates during Trump's first term. Anyone with a basic understanding of economics understood that a president has little to do with prices. (Not nothing, but the effect of presidential policies, with a few exemptions, is negligible). The inflation that we saw was caused by multiple factors: supply chain disruptions post-pandemic, increased demand for some items during Covid, and increased demand for different items after the pandemic died down, stimulus checks heating up demand, increased travel compared to a virtual shutdown causing shortages in fuel, widespread wage increases, opportunistic price increases by big corporations, and home valuations going up resulting in higher property taxes. 

Most people saw this as a binary economic choice. With inflation as the determining factor, Trump was good, Biden was bad, despite most other economic measures such as unemployment, stock prices, and job growth, being positive, people focused on inflation. They didn't want to hear the nuanced explanations from the Biden team and fell for the simplistic slogans from the MAGA camp. Trump doubled down on this, making all kinds of promises that would, if enacted, financially help most Americans. The problem was that it was all bullshit.

Trump promised to eliminate taxes on tips (Harris did this too) overtime, and social security. He promised to cap credit card interest at 10% and make interest on car loans tax deductible. Naturally he received loud cheers for this. But his most bullshitty promise was to reduce the price of gas and groceries. The price of a box of cereal is based on so many variables like supply chain increments, labor, and the cost of ingredients, that over the long haul prices go up but they never go back down. Deflation is not a good thing. Nonetheless, Trump has promised to bring down prices...quickly. The price at the gas pump has always seemed to operate under its own rules though. The trend is always upward, although there are peaks and valleys in the prices over time. The average gas price sunk to around $2.00/gallon in 2020 because people weren't driving. The peak prices of $4-$5/gallon in 2022 have since sunk back down to reasonable levels of under $3.00/gallon. 

Trump has already waffled on his promise to lower prices, which all of us who didn't vote for him knew was unattainable. In an interview last week Trump was asked if his presidency would be considered a "failure" if he didn't deliver on his promise to slash Americans' food bills. "I don't think so. Look, they got them up. I'd like to bring them down. It's hard to bring things down once they're up. You know, it's very hard”. Yeah. It's hard. How about it's impossible. Which we knew. Let's not forget that two of Trump's other promises, to increase tariffs  and deport millions of immigrants are among the few actions that a president that are guaranteed to cause inflation. 

What does this tell us? That Trump simply doesn't care about lower and middle income Americans once he has their votes. He can't run again, so he doesn't need to court the electorate, except to stroke his insatiable ego. We can count on any of his campaign promises that would have helped 99% of Americans to be forgotten as he prioritizes actions that help the 1% and smooth the way for revenge against those who tried to hold him accountable. 

What Will He Do?

What will he do? That's the question that has been consuming everyone who pays attention to politics. While we should always consider with a skeptical eye any campaign promises a candidate makes, the second Trump administration leaves us with more questions than usual.

Even with a "normal" president, campaign promises are often more aspirational than concrete. Congress may not support the campaign promises. Global events may completely derail presidential plans. Bursting housing bubbles and pandemics change everything. 

With Trump it's a whole 'nother game.

Attempting to figure out what Trump will do in his second term is not as simple as listening to what he says. One reason for that is that he's a shameless, unrepentant, liar. Not just the typical politician's lies to make themselves look better, but lies about everything. Who else would spend valuable time during a debate arguing about crowd size? Or continuing to bring up a "Michigan Man of the Year" award that never happened? A corollary effect of his lying is that he will say whatever it takes to get people to applaud during his rallies. In Nevada, where the hospitality industry provides the lion's share of employment, he promises to eliminate income taxes on tips; in industrial areas, it's taxes on overtime. To his typical anti-immigrant audience he emphasizes deporting millions. His stance on abortion changes depending on who he's talking to.  

Another aspect of Trump's personality which effects the actions that he takes is that he is a narcissist. He has be to be the main character of every story, the guy in the spotlight. If any of his cabinet members, advisors, or supporters looks like they're getting credit for a program, even if it conforms to a known Trump priority, Trump's ego will prevail over getting his agenda implemented. Trump may say things that make his supporters think that he has their best interests at heart, that he loves our country and is doing things that they believe are best for the nation, but Trump is only in it for the boost to his own ego. He only ran for the second term because he couldn't stand the humiliation of losing in 2020 to the man he derided as "Sleepy Joe". 

Let's not forget, despite having been the president from 2017-2020, he is still profoundly ignorant about how things work. The most obvious example is his repeated misrepresentation of how tariffs work. He has no desire to learn how to connect the dots regarding any of his ideas or their ramifications. An observation that I saw the other day was a speculation about what minor concessions would Trump accept from Mexico, Canada (Canada!) and China in order to claim that his threat of tariffs "worked". He has already lied about the President of Mexico's response, claiming that she agreed to "close the border" - she responded that she would never do that. 

The previous examples focus on how things he said he would do might not get done. But there are a number of his pronouncements that are illegal, or unlikely to garner Congressional support, that a reasonable person might conclude can't get done. But this is an area where his ego and ignorance could very well combine into an arrogant attempt to circumvent the Constitution. His success at evading any meaningful accountability for his actions, combined with the Supreme Court ruling giving him virtually unlimited immunity from prosecution, will surely embolden him to ignore Congress and the courts. Of all his cabinet picks, the selection of Pam Bondi, who unlike Jeff Sessions, fully supports prosecuting Trump opponents for whatever imaginary crimes she can dream up, is the most disturbing. It remains to be seen whether the Senate will comply with Trump's "suggestion" that adjourn so that he can make recess appointments and avoid Senate confirmation hearings, but it's an authoritarian "suggestion" nonetheless. 

I'm under no illusions about this administration. But I just don't know how bad things will be. 

The Trumpist Cult of Ignorance

Trumpism is a cult. Many who voted for or otherwise support Trump are offended by this characterization, mainly because they don't know what a cult really is, or understand how a cult leader gets and keeps followers. 

I was in a cult for many years, been out for over twenty and have had the opportunity to reflect on my involvement and how the cult experience is applicable to today's politics. My series So, You Want To Join a Cult delves into the subject at some length. 

Trumpists get offended because they think a cult has to be people drinking the literal Kool-Aid, or are brainwashed, and have no free will. Cults are much more banal than all of that. One of the reasons people are taken in by cult leaders is ignorance. 

When I was involved in a religious cult, most people who joined had only a superficial understanding of the Bible, so the confident pronouncements of the cult leader sounded like they must be right. Of course there was little bit of truth - which was the bait. In my own specific cult, the leader, in his foundational instructional class spent a lot of time pointing out how what most Christians believed was not supported by the Bible itself. This wasn't to undermine faith in the Bible (he had spent hours hammering home the idea that the Bible was inerrant) but to undermine confidence in what he called "denominational Christianity". He then substituted a faith in his own teachings, which, if we had followed his own advice to "read what was written" and various other methods for vetting what we were taught, we would have realized were at least as unreliable as what the churches were selling. 

The cult leader started out by showing us how his doctrine lined up with the Bible, but quickly veered off into "trust me, I know what I'm talking about" territory. We were even encouraged to "hold in abeyance" any doubts or questioning, convinced that the problem was our own limited understanding rather than the doctrine itself. The ignorance that we brought into the cult was reinforced into a belief that we could never be as smart of educated in Biblical studies as our leader. 

The cult of Trump is similar. 

Although there was an emotional attraction, in particular the fear that many White people had about immigrants and the vast amorphous "others", there were a number of people who thought that Trump actually had solutions to their perceived problems. As with religious cult involvement, the pathway to thinking that Trump had the answers was ignorance. 

One of the most common rationales that I heard from people who supported Trump, apart from the rabid anti-immigration or anti-"woke" arguments, was that he was better for the economy. This, of course, is an argument based on a profound ignorance of how the economy works. While there are actions that president can take which will affect the economy, in general, it is something that government has little control over. The factors that led to global inflation 2021-2023 and enduring high prices can be traced, among other things, to increased demand following depressed purchasing during the pandemic, supply chains not ready to restart, increased wages, and corporate price gouging. Interestingly, gas prices shot up 2021-2023, but have since settled own to right around where they were pre-pandemic. 

Trumpists not only convinced themselves that the economy was robust because of Trump and that inflation was caused by Biden, but somehow Trump would wave his magic wand and bring prices back down to pre-Biden levels. Social media is full of Trumpers celebrating the soon to be lower prices after Trump is sworn in on January 20, 2025. These beliefs are based on ignorance of economics. Related to this is Trump's ignorance of how tariffs work. He has insisted that tariffs are paid by foreign suppliers, or even foreign governments, when in reality they are paid by the importer, who passes those costs on to the consumer. 

Trumpist ignorance is not limited to economics, but can be applied to any subject. This can be traced back to Trump's own ignorance, with his followers declining to fact check him. They simply take what he says at face value. Their "research" is more often than not other Trump cultists conforming their "facts" and conclusions to what Trump has already told them to believe. 

Naturally there are other aspects to Trumpism and the Cult of Trump, but it all starts with ignorance and snowballs from there.