The age of impunity

[bemildred]

By Jeffrey D. Sachs May 13, 2016

The Panama PaperS opened yet another window on the global system of financial corruption, showing how political leaders and businesses use shell companies in secrecy havens like the British Virgin Islands and many US states to evade taxes and hide corruption and other crimes. Yet the system of corruption depends on another factor beyond secrecy, one that is perhaps even more important: impunity. Impunity means that the rich and powerful escape from punishment even when their malfeasance is in full view.

Impunity is epidemic in America. The rich and powerful get away with their heists in broad daylight. When a politician like Bernie Sanders calls out the corruption, the New York Times and Wall Street Journal double down with their mockery over such a foolish “dreamer.” The Journal recently opposed the corruption sentence of former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell for taking large gifts and bestowing official favors — because everybody does it. And one of its columnists praised Panama for facilitating the ability of wealthy individuals to hide their income from “predatory governments” trying to collect taxes. No kidding.

Our major institutions, the ones that should know better, are often gross enablers of impunity. Consider my alma mater, Harvard University, and its recent nuptial with hedge-fund manager John Paulson. Paulson was the coconspirator with Goldman Sachs of one of the most notorious scams of the recent financial bubble.

Paulson and Goldman constructed and marketed a portfolio of toxic assets to sell to unwitting investors so that Paulson could bet against the portfolio. Goldman and Paulson thereby turned the sucker investors’ quick $1 billion loss into an equivalent $1 billion gain for Paulson, with Goldman collecting on fees. The SEC fined Goldman but left Paulson untouched. As one

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/05/12/the-age-impunity/LHBxamqFENCs3W6lvWnCIJ/story.html

[Laughing Mirror]

1. The art of impunity & Doing God's work

And forever apologizing for "mistakes" with "if I had to do over" again, I'd do it differently," while fully realizing that if they had to do it over again, they'd do it the exact same way, for sure. Because that is what is expected of them. That's how they roll. That's how they get more, doing God's work.

If and when they get caught, it hardly matters since nothing much will happen to them. After all, "they all do it," so who can you blame?

The age of impunity is the age of chaos. That's the age we're living in.

[bemildred]

2. It's a con, it's always been a con. They are the con artists of the present age.

It's what they know, it's what they do, and they aren't giving it up. Trump is just a crass emulator of what the likes of Paulson do.

[Laughing Mirror]

5. They are indeed

Trump is also more practiced at the long con than the rest of them. He's written books about it. He's quite transparent about how he operates. And still he out-cons the cons. That's what's got them in a panic.

Fascinating age for people who can see clearly through all this.

[bemildred]

6. That is a good point, he is kind of old school.

He doesn't rely on government protection, media protection, or the like, he is right out there. He operates on a lower level, so to speak, and the USA is sufficiently dumbed down again and information deprived again and socially isolated again, that it works again.

That's how I would put it.

And that is what I think they don't get, don't want to get.

And I think it hilarious, no pun intended. I've been waiting for somebody like Trump. I confess I'm a bit surprised it was him in particular, but he will do the job.

[Laughing Mirror]

7. It seems to have come down to a Twitter war now

between Trump and Hillary. This is rather hilarious, watching which of the two will summon up their powers to operate at that lower level the most effectively, potently, successfully.

So we watch and wonder which of the two will be most persuasive appealing to the fears, the deep emotions of an ignorant public fed so many lies after lies for so long, they just want to hear something big and comforting and transformative, something that will guide them out of the baffling self-sabotaging state they've been in for so long they don't know any better. They'll look for anybody to blame their troubles on. They're ripe for the picking.

So, which of these two persuasive artists, Trump or Clinton, will best be able to tap into the insecurities and deep fears people have about their future? Which one will better convince them to take the necessary action to get out and vote for the one or the other, as the only solution possible?

I don't think their respective policies will have much to do with it if they are able to hit people on that deep emotional level and carry them through to where they'll accept anything, just as some kind relief out of the mess they find the country in.

Since I stopped following the Twitter war between Trump and Elizabeth Warren, I don't know who came out ahead. We'll see how the one with Hillary goes.

[bemildred]

8. +1. nt

[bemildred]

9. Clinton braces for fight on Trump's terrain

Hillary Clinton’s campaign knows a national conversation about terrorism will take place on Donald Trump’s terms.

That’s why Clinton is matching him speech for speech, interview for interview and soundbite for soundbite in the wake of Sunday’s mass shooting in Orlando.

Recognizing Trump’s ability to swallow news cycles whole — and his willingness to disregard the boundaries of mainstream debate — the presumptive Democratic nominee came well-prepared for the political aftermath of the worst shooting in American history Monday. She immediately neutralized one of his prime attacks by ditching her reluctance to say “radical Islam,” and sought to corner the real estate developer into a conversation about specifics.

It’s a good thing, many relieved Democrats said Monday, because Trump’s singular focus on terrorism and his blunt prescriptions will keep the issue on the front burner for the foreseeable future.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/clinton-braces-for-fight-on-trumps-terrain-224297

[malthaussen]

3. They take full responsibility...

... as long, of course, as they don't have to pay any penalty for it.

It has always annoyed me that people of more-or-less good will, who are not part of the power structure, and never will be, and derive no benefit from it, and in fact are plundered by it just as are the rest of us marks, nevertheless defend it, and mouth such incredible platitudes as that the "humiliation" of being declared guilty is sufficient penalty for the most horrific crimes. That the powerful would wish this for themselves (except the odd scapegoat, who usually isn't really a member of the Club anyway) is understandable; that their victims would approve it is frankly baffling. I can only conclude that the design flaw in humans, our tendency to bend at the knee, has ramifications that are both broad and deep.

That immunity would be institutionalized is no surprise, since the powerful make the rules. That it is approved or ignored by those for whom it has no benefit, is astonishing.

-- Mal

[Downwinder]

4. So much for "broken windows" policing.

Who are the superpredators?