Who has the Power; “Creditors” or “Debtors?”

Donald Trump Grifter, losing money by stealing it

Trump lost a gargantuan $1.17 billion over that period. Avoiding paying any taxes for 8 of the ten years! He would call himself the 'debt king' because of things like that. He knew he could make money by borrowing money and then not paying it back.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/trump-new-york-state-tax-returns

Trump Admits he lost that money:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1126078422797602816

Trump thinks that making a billion dollars by unloading debts and losses onto marks is just good business.

But where it gets dicey is that, despite our country setting itself up as a responsible. It is not. Trump is typical in this.

General Principles of debt

I started this post nearly 3 years ago, to answer the question via thought experiment. I am exploring broader questions than whether Trump is a crook. It just happens that his criminality illustrates some points I've been making about our Piratical Privateering traditions in commerce and colonialization.

Who has the power? “Creditors” or “Debtors?”

Nothing illustrates this question like our corrupt President. Trump has built his business by bankrupting clients, customers, contractors, workers and those who trusted him. He is called “the debt king” for a reason. Like a King he has managed to avoid paying debts he owed, converted debt to his own hands, and built a reputation based on borrowed money. He illustrates a principle that used to apply to Kings during the pre-modern period.

It is a truism, axiom, maybe a principle that:

“If a commoner owes more money than he can pay, the King will lock him away.”

“If the King owes more than he can pay, then the State will make the debt go away.”

“We need fear the King, whether we owe him or he owe us.”

Trump is adept at making others pay for his mistakes. Like a Medieval King Trump can punish those he owes as easily as he punishes those who owe him.

The reality is that:

Money is not the root of all evil, debt is.http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/occupy-wall-street-demands-how-occupy/11/3/2011/id/37707?page=full

Countries have power over their coinage, debt. The sovereign power regulates markets in countries that are sovereign over their own affairs. Feudal Societies operated an exchange of promises between lords and their vassals, creating a hierarchy of mutual obligations of service. Modern societies exchange promises in the form of contracts. At one time money was coined gold or silver, copper or bronze. Societies with sovereign power could fix the value of coins in terms of the commodities they bought or sold. But sovereign or not, the issue in most countries is not treasure, loot or coins, but debt. Debt is the original sin of a banker based system. Capitalism professes to be about actual capital, but it is actually about debt and ownership.

The Original Sin in Central Banking

Thus where economics get dicey is that, what drives the business cycle is borrowing. What really drives recessions and depressions is whether people can borrow or attract investment without losing their property. In a sovereign country, if debt got to be so onerous that wealth was being concentrated and the people enslaved, the government would declare a Jubilee and cancel or zero out all debts. This like modern bankruptcy, would free up debt based businesses to borrow again. A society based on debt creates a lot of virtual wealth. When that wealth falls into few hands, so does the power of that country. People think that Republics exist to protect everyone from abuses of power, but aristocratic people want republics to protect the wealthy from being held to account.

despite our country setting itself up as a responsible. It is not. Our US Treasury is technically sovereign over money. But thanks to the influence of Alexander Hamilton and J. P. Morgan we privatized our banking system and put the pirates in charge of it.

“The UK government took banker debt and made it our debt while letting bankers off. Then told us: You're living beyond your means.” ― Fuad Alakbarov https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/debt?page=3

The Exercise of Power by Oligarchs

“If you or I owe, say 100,000$, the people we owe own us. ”

Economics is Testable

But economics is testable theory.

Those claiming it is untestable, like Von Mises and his praxeology crowd (see Faulty Assumptions Post), turn economics into a side show at best, or a collection of faulty dogma's at worse. The current "tax reform" will lead to disaster, will have to be reformed, and is not reform.

But it does represent an exercise in power by our wealthiest incipient Oligarchs. Our side-show discussion, never made it into the national debate, but they gave me grist to analyze our system. I wish the money discussions were national. Because I learned something. And that was:

Money does not belong to the Money Men

Money is not the property of "the money men". They've had that conceit off and on through history. The "Capitalist" era, wasn't really solely a time when investment in factories and actual capital made the world prosperous, it was also a time when the concept of property was enforced by armies and police worldwide, through piracy and privateering, expressed in colonialism, neocolonialism, dictatorships and even in socialism. But the place of the money men has always been fragile. Their origins as pirates meant that they could be robbed as easily as they robbed others. Their dependence on debt and interest.

Was reading today about the but had it done so, might have helped allay the anxiety people have about the costs of governing in the public interest. That subject is our money Power. The debate we had then continued among economists I know and in my own thought experiments.

The Necessity of Sovereignty over money

The importance of sovereignty over the money supply is illustrated by the lessons of colonialism and neo-colonialism. Most people don't understand the subject. Most wealthy people have a different view of even what money should be from the rest of us.

Money as Promises to Pay

Almost all money that can be exchanged in modern societies takes the form of "promises to pay", notes, tokens or accounting entries. The result is that those who are owed a lot can lend even more. Those who owe a lot have trouble borrowing.

Intrinsic Value Money

The wealthy claim to prefer that money either be coins with intrinsic value. But when that happens, Gresham's law operates and the coins with intrinsic value are withdrawn from circulation. Only the desperate or the acquisitive spend their intrinsically valuable coin. They prefer to hoard it for difficult times. The wealthy create a kind of currency in order to put at least some of their money to loose. They loan it or invest it as capital.

There is never enough currency to fuel an economy, so it is really in the best interest of the wealthy that token, note and accounting money be available. Their gold and silver is lost when they have to spend it or when desperate people break into their treasure vaults. When the official money is gold or silver, the wealthy wind up creating accounting money anyway. When the wealthy back their notes with gold, they have a tradition of absconding with the gold and leaving note holders holding worthless paper.

Treasure and Loot

The reason the monied prefer tokens with intrinsic value is that they need "treasure." They need valuables that are portable, valuable and can be sold in an emergency. Hence they prefer gold, jewels, valuables both as a display of wealth, prowess, virility and as a substitute for money while travelling or running from the law. Many of the wealthy, especially nouveau wealth, but also old money, never have enough wealth. They know people won't always be able to pay back their debts in a timely fashion, so treasure is also kept as something to either back their own borrowing or barter efforts.

Indeed, treasure is what usually backs "private money", at least nominally.

Pirates and Loot

Thus the difference between a pirate and a nobleman, is that a pirate has to use violence to acquire loot. Nobility own property that they can extract rents from, borrow against and lend at interest, or invest with an expectation of earning income from. The wealthy can acquire loot either through charging economic rent on the use of property they control, or by taking property that borrowers pledge as surety when they can't pay. The wealthy earn unearned income during good times, and acquire property and treasure from desperate people in hard times.

The United States has had paper currency for most of it's history. Much of it printed by private banks and unreliable. Promises to pay are only as good as their promises. Token money, accounting money & notes can be rendered worthless with the stroke of a pen or the fall of a government.

But that doesn't mean that modern privateers don't know that The writer/economist John T. Harvey, in an article, "Can America Afford Bernie Sanders' Agenda?" talks about Sovereign Money:

Privateering with the Money Power

From Hamilton to the present, who controls the money power has been vital to the survival and union of our country. To the extent it has operated in the common interest and funded communications and commerce it has been beneficial. To the extent it is operated for the benefit of the few it has created large fortunes, while dispossessing and enslaving masses. The Money power has been a source of both liberty and tyranny. It's been a key fight from before the constitution and was one of the fights that wracked the administration of our first President; George Washington, as one faction of our founders reacted suspiciously to Alexander Hamilton's proposed policies, another decided to take them over and use them for corrupt purposes, and a third faction went to war with the very idea of a central bank.

Who has the Money Power Keeps the Money

The surface issue then was whether the Federal Government should possess the money power fully or in tandem with the states. But the real issue was which private cabal -- one dominated by money men in the Northeast of the Country (Boston and Manhattan) -- or one dominated by diverse private banks dispersed around the country would control the money supply. And both factions, operated under the illusion that "hard money" (gold or Silver Commodity money) was real money and despised and abused paper money. Banks would print paper money and issue it with debt, establishing a win/win situation for themselves as long as no one caught on to their conversion of the reserves backing the paper. If the customer couldn't pay they'd take the property of the customer. If the customer paid back the debt they'd get interest from the customer. As my friend John Turmel pointed out, that interest constitutes a rent on money that leads to the bank acquiring much of the value of the economic activity leant money creates. Accounting money disappears when the debt is paid. It also disappears when the bubble created by its use, collapses.

He who has the money power winds up with unearned wealth and rental income.

The Original Alternative Schema

British privateers, operating through their Tory and Whig agents in Parliament first made the States subject to external money power by forbidding them to coin currency or issue their own credit money (paper money). Benjamin Franklin defended the States power to produce its own money. They ignored him, and that is one reason for the Rebellion.

“This is so because, unlike in Greece, every single penny of it is denominated in our currency. We don’t need to raise dollars from taxation, exports, or bake sales–we make them.” Harvey

“Don’t take my word for it. Here are just a few folks from across the political spectrum and in different walks of life saying the exact same thing:” Harvey

“In the case of United States, default is absolutely impossible. All U.S. government debt is denominated in U.S. dollar assets.” Peter Zeihan, Vice President of Analysis for STRATFOR” Harvey

“In the case of governments boasting monetary sovereignty and debt denominated in its own currency, like the United States (but also Japan and the UK), it is technically impossible to fall into debt default.” Erwan Mahe, European asset allocation and options strategies adviser” Harvey

“There is never a risk of default for a sovereign nation that issues its own free-floating currency and where its debts are denominated in that currency.” Mike Norman, Chief Economist for John Thomas Financial” Harvey

“Central banks can issue currency, a non-interest-bearing claim on the government, effectively without limit.” Alan Greenspan, Chair of the Federal Reserve (1987-2006)” Harvey

“There is no inherent limit on federal expenses and therefore on federal spending…When the U.S. government decides to spend fiat money, it adds to its banking reserve system and when it taxes or borrows (issues Treasury securities) it drains reserves from its banking system. These reserve operations are done solely to maintain the target Federal Funds rate.” Monty Agarwal , managing partner and chief investment officer of MA Managed Futures Fund” Harvey

“As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e., unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis” Harvey

“The necessity for a government to tax in order to maintain both its independence and its solvency is true for state and local governments, but it is not true for a national government.” Beardsley Ruml, Chair Federal Reserve Bank of New York (1937-1947)” Harvey

“I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself.” Ronald Reagan, President of the United States (1981-1989)” Harvey

“Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.” Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States (2001-2009)” Harvey

“A sovereign government can always make payments as they come due by crediting bank accounts — something recognized by Chairman Ben Bernanke when he said the Fed spends by marking up the size of the reserve accounts of banks.” L. Randall Wray, Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Senior Scholar at the Levy Economics Institute, and Co- Editor of the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics” Harvey

“Mind you, that doesn’t mean there cannot be other consequences. Inflation, for example, is a possibility. Also from Dr. Wray:” Harvey

“Government needs to be concerned about pressures on inflation and the exchange rate should its spending become excessive. However, with high unemployment and idle plant and equipment, no one can reasonably argue that these dangers are imminent.” Harvey

“In other words, if all of our resources are fully employed–which is our real budget constraint, not dollars–then this can cause the demand for goods and services to outstrip supply and thereby drive up prices. This was precisely the situation during World War Two. Of course, that period was hardly one of economic malaise because that kind of inflation is a problem in the same way that having six people ask you for a date on Saturday night is a problem–you are so popular you can’t keep up with demand. Things could be worse.” Harvey

“That’s not our problem today, however, when the standard measure of unemployment is 5.1% and the broad one is 10.3% (the latter includes discouraged workers and those who have taken part-time employment but wanted full-time). And this is why we have seen neither hide nor hair of even moderately high inflation during the current run up of the debt.” Harvey

“But returning to the main point, anyone who says the federal government doesn’t have the budget to manage Sanders’ (or anyone else’s) programs doesn’t understand how modern macroeconomies work. The federal government’s budget is not analogous to your own and it cannot run out of money (for a longer explanation of this, see The Big Danger In Cutting The Deficit). If they want to say instead that his agenda (Bernie Sanders: Agenda for America) will push us to the point that our resources will be fully employed, that’s possible.” Harvey

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/voodooeconomics.asp

My old blog page

My old blog is here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20181218231607/fraughtwithperil.com/cholte

I get all kinds of error messages when I try to go there, so I'm going to download the pages and maybe upload them again.

Killing US stupidly

For some reason the Song "Killing me Softly" is playing in my head as I write this. Only as my mind does, the words are "killing me stupidly." I won't inflict the doggerral (yet), but what is going on with this Corona Virus 2019 pandemic, is so incredibly insane that I'm not only sheltering in place in my own home, but the other tune that keeps playing in my head is the Twilight Zone theme song. Trump's handling of the issue, before we knew of the pandemic, has been incredibly crazy!

Back before my wife died, one of the groups I worked with were the medical logistics people. I forget the term for their group (the documents were all company sensitive so I don't think I have any left) but what they were doing was Epidemiological Situation awareness. One of the areas we were looking at was Pandemic readiness. I'm no expert, but some of the people I worked with were. My software friends were developing software to track outbreaks, ID, track and treat patients and exposures. What we should be doing is treating this like a war. But one where the enemy is the disease, not each other.

We should be mobilizing:

1. Providers and training people to help them.
2. Isolation tents, ventilators, respirators.
3. Personal Protective Equipment for medical providers and anyone who might interact with the sick.
4. That includes gloves, masks, encounter suits, etc...
5. We need all the supplies now.

Instead

We have (or had) the people needed to deal with a global pandemic. John Bolton disbanded the Pandemic unit and pretended to move its function to the counter-terrorism unit. The military has experts in military logistics who use health intelligence to plan out exactly what is needed. The experts were ignored for talk of using quinine and snake oil, blow driers, and quack medicine to treat the disease, and efforts to protect the wealthy and keep businesses open despite the workers in them getting sick.

Results

Without contract testing and tracing

• The people with early signs of the disease spread it before they ever know they are ill
• Instead of quarantining the ill, we have to shut down everything.
• The people we need to fight the virus, will die themselves.

Without protective gear

• our doctors will get sick and be unable to treat the ill.
• Warehouse workers and truck drivers will get sick and be unable to deliver food and supplies
• The economy is collapsing.

All this was avoidable.

Some Contrarian Etymology

Off Topic

Often I see a word in English, Latin or other languages that is similar to words in Hebrew or Arabic. Since both are founded on even older languages, the notion that they weren't borrowed from the older languages is absurd. We don't know what languages were spoken everywhere throughout history, because not all languages were written down. But when you see words that have similar meanings across language families that have been connected in some way their entire history, it is entirely possible that the words were shared, even if the grammar and other history of the languages wasn't. People share words with other people. It's not accident that words like Genius and Jinn share a common sound. There are lots of similar words like that. Languages can converge by sharing vocabulary, or diverge by contact with other neighbors or isolation.

English as Pidgin

I also believe that many major languages started as pidgin languages spoken by people brought into commerce with one another. A "Synthetic" language is taught in schools (or by tutors) and serves the purposes of Governments and courts, but a pidgin language starts in markets as people try to understand one another. I believe that the Atlantic languages simplification of grammar reflects "pidgin" influences. In Britain, when Welsh, Angles, Saxons, Jutes and later Norse, Gaelic and French speakers, tried to do business with one another, their languages were so close they had to use short cuts to avoid misunderstanding each other. So they replaced complex Verb forms with simplified ones and used syntax and auxiliary words to convey parts of speech; past tense, future tense, intentionality, etc... Later, efforts to turn them into synthetic languages tried to freeze this dynamic pidgin as it was on the way to becoming English. English was also influenced by Welsh, Irish and other language speakers, who found it easier to use a pidgin than try to teach folks their own divergent languages. That is also why pidgins are so popular, and often similar, worldwide.

Recently I was reading a book on Mediterranean pirates and it devoted part of a Chapter to a language spoken by sailors on the Mediterranean. I believe he referred to it as "Ladino", which was strikingly like the Ladino my wife had studied as spoken by Sephardi Jews, but was a pidgin, not a form of Castilian Spanish.

Scholars like to develop hard and fast principles. I'll never forget a book on Wolves that differentiated wolves of different parts of the world by how they hold their tails. Anyone who has studied dogs or wolves knows that for those that have functional tails, how tails are held depends on mood, not race or subspecies. I suppose the scholars got all their information from somewhere. But that is why science lives by validation and experimentation. We all get it wrong many times before we get it right, at least on some subjects. Reality is messy and pure-breeds get genetic diseases. We can under-estimate risks, or over-estimate them. We can claim family resemblances where it is pure accident, or ignore family resemblances because of prejudices.

Stopping Trump

As David Kaye Johnson notes in his op-ed:

“Pelosi waited until she got an issue that should have alarmed the Republicans, a threat to our national security. Not only did witnesses and documents show that Trump helped Moscow’s push to occupy all of Ukraine, but she also showed the world that in 2020 the president and top Congressional Republicans were spreading Kremlin propaganda about our 2016 election.” [David Kaye]

Despite the clear evidence here, the Senate Republicans acquitted him. This has emboldened Trump. Simply running on that record won't be enough.

David concedes that investigations need to continue.

Letter

Dear Representatives Jerry Nadler, Adam Shiff, Nancy Pelosi, and the entire Caucus of representatives and Senators wishing to uphold rule of law.

We face a grievous threat. We tried to impeach Donald J. Trump and the Republicans in the Senate, with only one defection, refused to hold him accountable. We now face a lawless President, who is likely to use all his powers to get away with numerous crimes. He will then, as Barr did in 1992, get the President to use his pardon power to quash any investigations. How do we stop that?

Suggestion:

What the House can do is threefold:

1. First, the house should draw up additional articles of impeachment, for all the miscreants involved in the Trump Administration. They should name William Pelham Barr, Chief of Staff Mulvaney, and list witnesses and co-defendents. And list all the evidence. When you vote on these additional articles of impeachment, refer to the coverups.
2. The Articles of impeachment should be accompanied by referrals to prosecution for Barr, Trump and All the other alleged co-conspirators. This should be voted on as part of the impeachment resolutions.
3. Finally, Congress should include a Resolution of Censure with each article and each referral for indictment.

The final resolution should say;

We pass these articles of Censure, referrals for prosecution and impeachment, without any hope that the House will conduct a trial or hear the evidence at this moment. We therefore shall hold these articles of Impeachment, open and hold them from delivery until after the morning of November 4, 2020, when we shall ask the Senate to begin deliberation, in respect for the Election. No witness or co-defendant of any party named in these cases of impeachment may have their impeachment case pardoned or commuted until these articles are delivered and the Senate has conducted a trial.

David Kaye Johnson Article:

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/02/heres-how-nancy-pelosi-is-forcing-trump-and-the-gop-over-a-cliff/

Election Judges! Election Courts!

Judging Elections

Elections are, in essence, a judicial process where common citizens acting as voters, judge the fitness of candidates and elected officers to serve them. They need the power to:

1. Scrutinize candidates, officers and their promises
2. Determine Fitness for Office
3. Hold officials accountable for performance.
4. Enforce transparency

Elections are where voters judge who is fit to lead them.

These are judicial functions, but also personnel decisions. Election courts don't decide whether or not a person is guilty of crimes, but whether they are fit for the office the people are electing him or her to.

Best Practices for Elections

Because elections are a judicial process they should be run with best practices that embody the best and most appropriate judicial principles.

Election Courts

The role of the election court is to ensure that the hiring authority, we the people, oversee the appointing of officers, Governors, Presidents, legislators. The people deserve to know what they are getting into.

Election courts have two missions;

Vetting, Shepherding elections and scrutinizing candidates

Scrutinizing Elected Officials at end of Term

Election Stakeholders

There are five sets of Stakeholders in an election.

1. Voters are first.
2. Parties, Factions, Movements and Activists.
3. The Candidates, their factions and associations.
4. Reporters and Investigators.
5. Election Officials

All these stakeholders need to be represented in the process, which is why elections need to be run as if a court.

A judicial process requires judicial structures

The required scrutiny, vetting and accountability, requires the election be run as a court would be run. A proper election court must involve all the stakeholders who have an interest in the outcome of that election. It is up to the hiring authority, thru elections to judge candidates and officers on their qualifications and accomplishment. To do that requires that the court include representation of the candidates, their factions and parties, and that they are able to argue their case. The Beauty of using election courts is that the judge and juries involved can verify and validate the claims made by the candidates and their factions.

Election Judging Requires they behave like judges

We we need better election judging because currently "election judge" is often a misnomer. They need to behave like judges. That happens when they are prohibited from holding other office for the term of their office and beyond at least one term. It also happens when the local factions and candidates have a right to representation in the processes and events of the election. Representation of candidates in the court should be mandatory. The representatives should have a say in selecting the review panels that question candidates. The judge function should be limited and subject to agreement from stakeholders except on matters of law. Election Judges, through the the processes of the election court and the actual election, should have the power to enforce that these functions are done according to law but not to dictate outcomes or excert undue influence.

Election judges would have a prescribed, limited role to:

Oversee the scrutiny of candidates and officers.

Shepherd the process and ensure that the election is conducted fairly.

Select investigators and reporters to investigate and report on proceedings.

Select election panels to conduct scrutiny and debate, with input from the interested parties in the election.

Judge according to law and refer legal violations to an ordinary court.

Jury Panels Scrutiny

Every Candidate for a position of Trust, for elective or appointive office, should be vetted through an election court jury panel that includes the voters who stand to elect him or her. During Primaries the panels should be registered party members. During the general election, the pool of all registered voters. The purpose of these panels is to question candidates and investigators so that voters can judge the fitness for office of candidates and elected officers. The ultimate jury is the voters. The jury structures would serve the purposes of groups like the League of Women Voters or similar. They manage and develop information for scrutiny, vetting, debates. The panels would also rule on decisions made by election judges that are disagreed with by principles in the election (Candidates, factions, parties and their representatives).

Investigators and Reporters

The press is named and protected in the USA constitution for a reason. The reason is that elections require that ordinary people, who don't have time to be involved in elections full time, are kept informed. For that reason investigators and reporters need a license to investigate and report on candidates for office, and of elected officials seeking reelection and of the government offices they hold. This is a critical thing and needs to be resourced and funded by the public. The press should have a right to participate in elections in this role. They should be part of the election courts, questioning candidates and presenting information to voters.

Entry Points to Elections

When an election is scheduled, an election judge should stand up an election court for each phase of the election. Candidates should have to sign an agreement that their background be checked and scrutinized. The court can decide how much of the details of that information can be kept confidential, but the public should be informed of any past criminality or relevent scandal through the election jury panel.

Step One: Confidential Scrutiny

As an entry point for running for office each Candidate for office should agree to be investigated and scrutinized then and at the end of their term should they win the election. Candidates for reelection should have the performance of their previous term investigated, scrutinized and reviewed by the "Election Jury" panel under guidance of representation and testimony of investigators. If they want to run for reelection this should be mandatory. If they are stepping down, it should be done anyway.

We have a duty to look into candidate finances, associations, criminal and civil history, just as if they were applying for a clearance for a public trust job. Because they are. They should also agree to end of term scrutiny.

Step Two: Performance Review and report

This professional confidential review, should be done by a panel led by Election judge, with testimony by investigators and local reporters, some brought in by the Election judge, some by the interested Parties, including the candidate.

Those completing a term should have their performance reviewed and that review, with minority opinions represented entered into the public record after review by the panel. They work for "We the People."

Transparent Process

Interested parties and local press should have the right to petition to be part of this panel as witnesses and observers. They should be sworn to confidentiality for the duration of the hearings. Violating that oath should be cause for ejection and bar from further participation for a term. But once the work is done, it should be public record.

Inquisitory Powers

The Panel should have the power to subpoena, compel testimony, look at records, examine and cross examine investigators, witnesses, and claims based on evidence.

All this would be under oath. Perjury would be referred to an ordinary court.

Report Product

The product of this panel would be a report, which would be required to be a factual document allowing minority and majority opinions based on facts alone. The subject would be limited to fitness for office and background.

Disagreements on content would be referred to a jury of ordinary citizens using the voir dire process. Once all the panel, or jury, agree on the factual content of the report, it can be published and used in the election. Parts not agreed on in opinion, if they are factual, go to a minority report.

End of Term Performance Reviews

Election courts would be to use the same process of using experts and investigators for a review panel would look at elected officers at the end of their term, whether they run for reelection or not.

Judicial Powers

Election Courts should have subpoena and investigatory powers, and contempt powers, but no prosecutorial powers. They should have referral powers when a criminal action is discovered. The power to subpoena, take testimony, seek and seize documents and the power to put people under oath and refer them for perjury powers if they commit perjury, should be the limit of their power. In scrutinizing candidates and officers, they should have the power to examine financial, criminal, and background records. The agreement to submit this should be a condition of seeking office.

Election managers should be an executive position supervised by election judges but separate from them.

Judicial Election Judges

Forbidden to run for office for the term of their Judgeship + 1 election.

Oversee elections as judges, but have limited powers.

Must use Election panels to moderate different phases of the election.

Must use processes similar to a trial for the scrutiny power.

Investigatory Vetting Scrutiny process

Elections should employ reporters and investigators and empower them to dig into finances, backgrounds and qualifications in a manner nearly identical with clearance investigations. Indeed clearance investigations should use these courts.

Professional Investigators and Journalists should be empowered to look into all relevant matters of candidates and officers reaching term. Their results should be presented to the court during the preliminary sessions and after validation in open session. When in Open Session, that information must be public as well as accurate. Preliminary results should be verified and validated before being presented in Open Session. And during preliminary Session, and open session, the parties involved should have representation and be able to cross examine witnesses.

When there is a dispute between the parties, election juries should moderate those disputes. Selected on Jury trial principles but allowed to make some decisions on a majority vote. But not allowed to go beyond investigations and fact checking except to make referrals to a criminal court if illegal behavior discovered.

Preliminary Sessions

When the Candidate or officer is to be scrutinized, a panel should be assembled using a voire dire style process, of selecting ordinary citizens for the panel with 1/3 approved by the Candidate, 1/3 by an "Inquisitor" or by opposition candidate representative, whose job is to inquire as to the person under investigation, and 1/3 by the Judge. The panels should also include local press. Investigators gather documents, interview and record results and bring them back to the court. The information then is validated as much as possible and put into a preliminary report.

Preliminary Review

Once the Preliminary Report is assembled the Judge, inquisitor and representative review the preliminary report. Anything challenged gets investigated further. At some point the Judge shall present the Preliminary Review to the Jury. The Jury then shall work with the Judge, journalists, inquisitor and representation to validate the report. The Jury shall ask questions at this stage.

Open Session

The Final Fitness report shall be produced and reviewed in open session. Recording majority and minority views on the subjects reviewed, and the facts of the subject. This then becomes a record to go into election reporting, debates and election process

Election debates

Once the background checks and scrutiny are complete. The panels can then conduct debates to get candidates on the record as to proposed policies, goals, etc... These debates and sessions should also be public. and the reporters should be enabled to report on and summarize the positions.

Free Press

The Press, has a formal role in this process and may be subdivided up into jobs that are more than mere stenographers and archivists, but may involve reporters and investigators who's training overlaps that of police detectives. This process would ensure that the free press can do its actual job.

Rationale

A free press is necessary to the health of our society because it has a role in the recording, vetting and accounting of what the government does. Reducing reporting to a clerical role destroys its power to check officials. In elective courts journalists would be required to do sensitive investigations, not release sensitive information until the proper time.

Elective Bar

Journalists, investigators, jurors, Judges, all officers of the Election court should be sworn in as officers of the court. Their words should be considered under oath and penalty of perjury.

Vengeful Trump

Trump as an Evil Person

Donald J Trump, is acting increasingly erratic, vengeful, angry and authoritarian. No one is really surprised by this. His followers seem fine with it. He is targeting critics. Moving to destroy his Democratic rivals, and acting exactly as expected. 3 years ago, he didn't know what he was doing. He put people who shared some of his philosophy, but not his criminality around him. They kept him from breaking too many laws til he drove them away. Now he is getting the hang of things. He has his "Yuri Chaika"/Roy Cohn in the form of Bill Barr. The only target he hasn't completely subordinated is the FBI, and he inveghs against his appointee, Christopher Wray. Wray will either succumb or be replaced. Trump also wants his J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover, who kept two file cabinets on every politician in the country, full of kompromat he could use if they threatened his power or his funding, is the kind of person who can be relied on to keep people in line, so Trump can go about his business of making money.

This is a draft I'll ad to later.