Update no.905

Update from the Sunland

No.905

6.5.19 – 12.5.19

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            Jeanne and I spent a long weekend back in Wichita for graduation celebrations.  Our oldest grandchild—Aspen Shae Loe—graduated from Friends University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology.  Her younger sister—Shalee Lynn Prichard—graduated from Maize High School and is headed off to the University of Kansas in the Pre-Med program.  It was great and a genuine pleasure to see family and friends.  As this Update hits the wire, we are headed home to get some rest after a very hectic weekend.  Congratulations to Aspen and Shalee . . . and to their parents, who raised two exceptional young women.

            The follow-up news items:

-- The House Judiciary Committee voted on a contempt of Congress resolution against Attorney General Barr—22 ayes – 12 nays—for his refusal to turn over the full, un-redacted Special Counsel Report [804, 898] with supporting evidence [900].  I cannot represent the reasons members avoided or were not able to vote. The Committee membership is: 24 Democrats, 17 Republicans.  I would like to think those who did not vote did not agree with the action and wanted to avoid being on the record with a vote on this issue.  The resolution must go to the full House, and then quite probably to the Judiciary for decision.  Given the BIC’s current state of mind, the BIC & his cronies may well attempt to defy even the Supreme Court, but that is several steps away.

-- The BIC decided to up the ante in the trade war with the PRC [844] by directing increased tariffs to 25% from the previous 10% on US$200B worth of Chinese products, on the eve of critical negotiations. As I have written, confronting and resolving the abusive and predatory trade practices of the PRC is a worthy and correct objective, but I strongly disagree with using tariffs as the bludgeon to that end, as the wounds are largely self-inflicted.  As Julius Caesar so succinctly and eloquently proclaimed: iacta alea est.

-- The Treasury Department rejected the nice and proper request for the BIC’s tax returns [900], so the House Ways and Means Committee issued subpoenas for the records in accordance with the law—Revenue Act of 1924 [PL 68-176; 43 Stat. 253; 2.6.1924] [885].

            The BIC’s open defiance of congressional oversight continues unabated.  The Treasury as well as the BIC’s lawyers (oh wait, they are all one and the same now) claimed there was no “legitimate legislative purpose” in the proper congressional request.  So, hardball it is.  If there was no “legitimate legislative purpose” in the subpoena for the BIC’s tax returns in accordance with established law, what was the “legitimate legislative purpose” in the expansive Benghazi investigation?  FYI: this whole “legitimate legislative purpose” notion is a deduced inference not mentioned or implied in the law, i.e., they apparently made it up.

            An interesting parallel footnote: the 1924 law cited above grew out of the 1921/23 Teapot Dome Scandal that involved many Harding administration officials in serious greed, corruption, graft and violation of the common good.  I think the House is spot on correct in pursuing this course; however, I am confident the BIC’s administration will use every tool available to resist and stonewall congressional efforts at oversight and accountability, as long as they possibly can.  As always, it is ultimately We, the People, who will pay the price for any malfeasance.

-- The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee issued a subpoena for BIC Junior to testify about previous answers he gave to congressional investigators as part of their Russia probe [782, 804].   This is the first time Congress has subpoenaed a member of the BIC’s family and may well mark a turning point in the Russian election interference investigation.  I wonder if they will defy this subpoena as well?

-- The DPRK fired off a number of short-range missiles in an apparent attempt to get the BIC’s attention, and to presumably to ratchet up tensions after the BIC walked out of the last meeting with his bosom-buddy Kim [895].  The BIC is getting a good taste of what it is like to negotiate with the North Koreans.

-- For a more enlightening illumination of the myriad reasons Boeing is in the pickle it is, as a consequence to the two B737-MAX8 accidents [878, 896], this article comes the closest to striking the central root-cause.

“Former Boeing Engineers Say Relentless Cost-Cutting Sacrificed Safety – The failures of the 737 Max appear to be the result of an emphasis on speed, cost, and above all shareholder value.”

by Peter Robison

Bloomberg Businessweek

Published: May 8, 2019; 9:01 PM MST

http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001OQBv6Pztx4Qa0DqEcuhYKs8Xc4J7kEF14nQTkVTYqJrMpLXKbcXEoEsbDl_O1OAe_zt1ARiIKmdjjUi1wiaxtZY-dF8_176-k7UT_y2iFJPZ48O2owaUDS1NjtXQRgtI_8LbhcMsQO47z6w9c5LVeHgWmSrBOabuUXAn3PYTrftzutJUr_qOlIUQK5lvNTY0PtMRXJmTBfK8C0ZhYWIo8t_gkXZlSP3ht

I have seen this phenomenon personally and first-hand, as the last eight years of my professional life were spent investigating and fixing (more than a few) field reliability issues associated primarily with the Beech Premier I light jet aircraft. The phrase of wisdom I was confronted with consistently and repeatedly, and appears to be applicable in the case of the current Boeing situation, is penny-wise, pound-foolish—a centuries old English idiom.  When cost becomes the dominant, if not sole, parameter in the engineering design process, bad decisions are made and the ultimate cost becomes far greater than the original cost saving could ever hope to be over the lifetime of the product.  The Boeing situation is looking more and more like just that sort of myopic failure. Fortunately, in my direct experience, no lives were lost or injuries induced by the problems I dealt with; Boeing was not so lucky.  Although I must confess as a footnote, we came dreadfully close in a few instances.

            In all fairness, despite my focus of fixing field reliability problems, I will emphatically state that the Beech Premier I aircraft was one of the best, most enjoyable airplanes to fly in my direct, hands-on experience—one helluva machine.  The aircraft has been out of production for a few years now. It’s demise was not due to any of the teething problems I dealt with or was aware of in its service life.

-- For the first time I am aware of, the U.S. seized a DPRK bulk cargo ship—MV Wise Honest—for allegedly attempting to move coal in violation of the strict sanctions imposed on North Korea.  This cannot sit well with the BIC’s bosom-buddy Kim [845].  I suspect we are on our way into a rough patch.

            My apologies to the following contributor. The Comment was lost temporarily in an ocean of SPAM that is the nature of our cyber-lives these days.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.901:

“Interesting to read!  This is just putting my toe in-for now.  It would be too easy to just expound on all #45’s faults.  I am extremely curious to see how the IRS subpoena will end.  Also, curious to see what Congress will see in the entire full version of The Mueller Report.  How will Congress handle the ten obstruction events?”

My response to the Blog:

            My apologies for this tardy response.

            Thank you for your interest in my Blog. Your comments and contributions are always welcome.

            Yeah, the BIC (#45) is a very easy target. He is not a good man.

            I think you are not alone.  Many of us are quite interested.  I’ve always seen him as the consummate snake-oil salesman—worthless product sold with vigor to innocent people who cannot see beyond his carnival barker claims of a universal cure-all.  The reason I believe he has gone to mat now is he desperately does not want the curtain pulled back to expose him for what he is—a charlatan, fraud and snake-oil salesman.

            Congress has seen more of the Special Counsel’s Report than we have, with only the grand jury information redacted in their version.  We have yet to hear an assessment from Congress on that additional information.  The House Judiciary Committee ultimately will see the whole document (un-redacted) and the underlying evidence, but it will take time, and potentially a lot of time, as it will take a court decision. I suspect, the BIC being the BIC, he may attempt to resist the court order, which would put us deep into a constitutional crisis.  Mueller’s testimony under oath in open session is vital.  Whether the House decides to impeach the BIC for what I see as clear obstruction is a whole larger question.  My current opinion is, unless they have a reasonable shot at convincing 67+ senators to convict and remove (18 or 19+ Republicans must join that decision), they should not attempt impeachment.  [I would love history to record the BIC as the ONLY POTUS to be removed from office by impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors, but that is a very tenuous path.]  Impeachment without conviction is more injurious than beneficial, IMHO.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.904:

Comment to the Blog:

“The ‘vise of the law’ (good phrase!) has been tightening since before the election.  The closing of that vise seems inevitable to me.

“One lesson Chump failed to learn from other modern-day mobsters is keeping a low profile.  It seems obvious. 

“Precedent says obstruction of justice requires neither success nor another crime for conviction.

“I’ve read the introduction and executive summary of each volume of Mueller’s report.  Based on that, Mueller prefers not being allowed to charge Chump.  He goes well beyond the policy of not prosecuting by refusing to offer any meaningful opinion.  His investigating authority does not include rendering judgment, but includes the obligation to opine officially on whether a crime occurred.  That’s what law enforcement does. Mueller certainly did so with other criminals he encountered in his investigation.  Some of them are serving prison time today.  Mueller further states that he would offer exoneration if he possibly could.

“Please explain ‘tribal parochialism.’  This is political life as it’s always been, but out in the open thanks to new media.

“Why would Mueller refuse to testify?  I’m mystified.

“The Boeing scandal is one more example of self-regulation failing.

“We have seen a jobs report here in Ohio.  Many jobs are open, but 60% of them would not support a family of three.  In other words, there’s no point in taking one of those jobs for most workers.

“The more I think about it, the more your use of the phrase ‘We the People’ bothers me.  Times have changed since that was written, but the unanimity implied in that phrase has never existed.

“The notion that a ‘not guilty’ impeachment is a desirable outcome is rooted in history and sociology, not law.  A guilty finding would result in a President Pence (yuck!) and in martyrdom (to his followers) for Chump.  I’d much rather handicap his reign than end it that way.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: vise of the law.  I sure hope so.  Time shall tell the tale.

            Re: low profile.  Got that right.  Not his style.  All snake-oil salesmen are audacious, flamboyant and very public; nature of the beast.

            Re: obstruction of justice.  Quite so.

            Re: Special Counsel’s Report.  I do not read it that way.  He had authority and in fact gained indictments on 30+ people (so far).  He had full authority to indict.  What he did not have, and he was very careful to lay out in the documentation, is the authority to indict or prosecution a sitting POTUS (i.e., the BIC).  [FYI: according to the OLC memoranda, neither did the AG have that authority, thus the AG had no authority to make the decision he did.]  Mueller extended the argument . . . if he could not indict or prosecute, then he must not charge or accuse, since a sitting POTUS has no means to defend himself.  Therefore, he must stay Joe Friday: “The facts, just the facts, ma’am.”  Thus, my inferred conclusion, he intended for Congress to make that judgment.

            Re: “tribal parochialism.”  Members of each political party, regardless of whether in office, defend their leaders and officers no matter what they have done; blind allegiance; party (tribe) over all else.

            Re: Mueller testify.  Just from his character, i.e., straight-laced, publicity averse, et cetera, I suspect he feels his report presents the facts they collected; everything else is political and beyond his domain. It is my opinion that he argued, implicitly (to avoid the political dimension) only Congress has the authority to resolve political questions, i.e., did the sitting POTUS commit obstruction of justice?

            I am not willing and cannot indict the DER system because Boeing management compromised the DERs in this instance. Those executives who applied the necessary pressure should be held accountable . . . and if the accusations are true, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and punished accordingly.

            I imagine similar job realities apply elsewhere.

            I am sorry my use of the term “We, the People” bothers you; not my intent.  I am not as critical of history.  If you collect two or more people, you have division and disagreement; it is human nature.  That reality does not mean we are not united.

            I appreciate your view of impeachment. I still see the cost of that action to be far greater than any benefit . . . kinda like the O.J. trial.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Snake-oil salesman indeed!  My New York Times Evening Brief last night (Tuesday, May 7) linked to an investigative article on Chump’s older taxes (1985-1994).  Apparently, his annual losses typically put him at the very top of the IRS list of individual failures most of those years.  That approach of his kept him successfully borrowing large amounts of money to augment his income from his father’s more successful real estate ventures.  (There might be a little tax fraud or whatever in there, too.)

“You stated, ‘Mueller extended the argument . . .’  That’s my point.  His reticence makes it far more difficult for Congress to do its job.  I understand your and Mueller’s distress over the need to essentially attack the person holding our highest office, but the integrity of the office and of our system of government is at stake here.  Mueller’s character avoids his duty.  His job, in this case, touches the political dimension.  He shirks that part, leaving it to others who will have a harder time doing it.  I recognize his character but I don’t respect him for it.

“What you call tribal parochialism goes back at least to ancient Rome.  The 24-hour news cycle and the Internet have brought this into the open and become tools for all parties.

“I will still not hold ‘We the People’ responsible for this minority President.  Nope, not happening.  A minority of those actually voting elected him, not ‘the people.’  My sense of responsibility overrules my willingness to idealize our system.

“With respect to impeachment, Chump’s base disregards arguments of good and evil, but if they perceive weakness that will be different.  They want this bully to protect them from the (mostly imaginary) threats of the rest of us.  If they see him as weak, that will be his downfall.  I see that as very related to the way he borrowed all that money.  It’s all about being seen as capable/strong regardless of moral character.  You and I value moral character, but we don’t live in fear.  Chump’s base does.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Yeah, I saw that NYT report and an interview with the principal author.  The BIC’s recoil reaction is demonstrative and quite indicative of one of his greatest vulnerabilities—his performance as a businessman.  His narcissistic ego cannot handle such exposure.  The business losses are also indicative of why U.S. banks of any repute will not lend him money. Not reflected in the NYT data, he has declared bankruptcy five (5) times with untold additional losses and collateral destruction; how many other businesses have been forced into bankruptcy and failure?  I have recognized and acknowledged the BIC as a snake-oil salesman for many years, long before he declared his candidacy (2015).  What I have not yet done is declared his worthless snake oil as destructive and injurious, not just worthless.

            Perhaps so, but I think Mueller went as far as he could within his view of the constraints imposed by his charter. I do not agree that he was avoiding his duty.  I read the Report in very clear terms.  As a citizen, I wish he had gone the next obvious step, but that would have been declared a partisan hack job.  He has very carefully tried to avoid the political dimension—“Just the facts, ma’am.”  I do respect him for it.  He left the best trail of breadcrumbs to follow he could.  I think the path is quite clear.  He cannot push people down the road.  I appreciate your frustration, which I share in part, but Mueller tried mightily to stay on the high road rather than jump into the political muck where the BIC lives.

            Re: tribal parochialism.  Perhaps so.  I cannot disagree.  We saw another graphic demonstration in the House Judiciary Committee meeting this morning (Wednesday) during the AG contempt vote.

            We shall respectfully disagree.  I do not idealize our electoral system; we have myriad flaws and failures, not least of which is the massive complacent abstention reality.

            Well now that is an interesting observation I had not considered.  When you are on the side of the schoolyard bully, people cheer him on. Not so when you are the object of the bully’s attention or vindictiveness.  Like the weaker among us, they flitter around the alpha trying to grab scraps and drippings as he gorges himself.  As soon as they perceive weakness, they will turn on him and he knows it. Well said.  Thank you.

Another contribution:

“Liked your ‘snake oil’ tradesman.  This business with China-it is suggested here that he may be on the right course with this nation.  I’ve no doubt you’ll be covering this in the next blog.

“(Must try this snake oil-it may be all I need.)!!  Recommended?”

My reply:

            Re: PRC.  Yes, I have to give the BIC credit for taking on the PRC.  The Chinese have abused our commercial relationship for decades, and previous presidents shied away from or refused to tackle the endemic problem(s).  The BIC took on the PRC straight ahead.  He deserves credit for that, especially if his efforts lead to a beneficial correction.  However, as I have stated, I strongly disagree with his methods—tariffs hurt everyone and ultimately We, the People, pay the bills—not the Chinese.  Nonetheless, we are in it now, like the die is cast. Thus, I think we must see it to the end, however painful it might be.  The PRC must be forced to abandon its abusive and predatory activities, and join the free world with truly free commerce.

            Re: snake-oil the BIC is selling.  No way, José!  Everything he sells is worthless, and regrettably some of his crap is outright harmful.  I find nothing of value in what he sells—not a single thing.  He has been selling his worthless (or perhaps even harmful) snake-oil crap for decades, long before he declared his candidacy.  Some folks swoon at the Siren’s song.  I do not!  I see his crap for exactly what it is—worthless, and not worth a farthing.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“‘Snake Oil’ yes I notice your BIC and his snake oil production, what a lovely expression. I notice that this product is allegedly a traditional Chinese medicament manufactured from the fat of a Chinese water snake.  But tests have shown there is none in this product!  The word is commonly used to describe a fraudster, a quack and charlatan, I just wondered in this case which of these descriptive words might apply?”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            There are numerous concoctions that are all equally worthless (or in some cases, actually harmful) to anyone who ingests them.  All of the descriptors you offered are applicable, along with others of the more profane category.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)