The Ghost of Sam Ervin Cross-Examines Christine Blasey Ford

Almost everyone is disgusted by the manner in which now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed.

But here at the Diary, we always look on the bright side, even when it’s pitch black.

Disgrace and revulsion

The feelings of disgrace and revulsion won’t last long. They will soon be replaced by panic and desperation. Yes, the good news is that the coming financial blow-up will give people something else to think about…something more real and immediate!

In the meantime, the US government is the greatest show on Earth. And it’s right in front of us…like a coliseum of ersatz clowns, political gladiators, innocent Christians, and senatorial lions all in the arena at once.

Every gesture is phony. Every statement is fraudulent. And the whole of it is a monumental fantasy.

A special combat medal, however, ought to be awarded to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee — for cowardice and dereliction (maybe a medallion depicting a man hiding behind a woman’s skirt).

Having hauled the poor woman — Christine Blasey Ford — all the way across the country, none of the members dared to cross-examine her, instead opting to have a hired prosecutor do the questioning on their behalf.

What a treat it would have been to see old Senator Sam Ervin back in action! We can almost imagine it.

For dear readers in need of a refresher, Ervin was a US senator who called himself an ‘old country lawyer’ from North Carolina. Sworn in at the height of McCarthyism, Senator Sam would go on to become the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities — known also as the ‘Watergate Committee’ or the ‘Ervin Committee’.


Dead senator

Rather than deconstruct last week’s myths, lies, and absurdities, let us resurrect a dead senator and put him back on the Judiciary Committee:

Now, Ms Blasey Ford, surely you’ve come to the Committee for a good reason. But I’d like to get a clearer view of what that might be.

You say you are 100% sure it was Mr Kavanaugh who attacked you. In my experience with witnesses, there aren’t many who are 100% sure of anything. And many of those who say they are sure turn out to be not-so-sure when you question them.

But you’ve thought about this event many, many times over the years — from soon after the event, when the memory was clear and bright…all the way to today. Isn’t that right?

What surprises me is that in all these many recollections — which have been so meaningful to you — so many of the important details seem to have slipped away. And I will point out that these are the details — time, place, people involved, and so forth — that would make it possible for us to test your memory and see how accurate it is.

That makes an old man like me a little nervous. Because we have a man’s career in the balance here…along with his reputation…and that of the Supreme Court, too. And we don’t want to act solely on the basis of an unsubstantiated charge from so long ago.

So let me ask you another question: Do you think nominees to the Court should be disqualified on the basis of the uncorroborated memories of a tipsy 15-year-old?

Not that there’s any special reason to doubt a teenager. I recall that it was a teenage girl, Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orléans, who led the French army and was burned at the stake as a witch. And she was tried by some of the finest legal minds in Europe at the time.

It was also a teenage girl who set off the Salem witch trials — after she remembered things that weren’t true — and got a number of innocent people killed.

I bring these things up only to remind us all that we humans — young, old, great, and humble — are capable of great error and terrible mischief.

And yet, you say you are 100% sure. And I suppose you wouldn’t be here unless you thought this was important enough to cause us to change our minds about Mr Kavanaugh.

But this memory relates to a 17-year-old boy. And here we are trying to determine whether the man that he has become is fit to be a Supreme Court judge.

We have heard from you that the boy was a drunken lout, and that he did things he shouldn’t have done. But what about the man? Should he be eliminated by something you say he did 35 years ago?

And I have a question about the moral system that you seem to be proposing. You know, in the Bible, Jesus says to the harlot: “Go forth and sin no more.” And to those who were ready to stone her to death, he said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”

And yet, you have cast a stone at a man who appears to have committed no sin, if I may use that word, since the 1980s. I am going to presume you are without sin yourself…But I am still troubled by the fact that you have cast a stone.

In your view, is there no place for error, for weakness, for redemption, and for forgiveness? Do you think a man who sinned as a teenager should be forever disqualified from a position of trust and responsibility?

And don’t you think that the boy who was a drunken lout might have grown up and turned into a respectable man who is now worthy of the Supreme Court?

With that, Senator Sam would look gravely at the witness and pause. She would have to admit that it was possible.

So don’t you think the Committee should be spending its time on evaluating the man…rather than the boy? Especially since we have no way of knowing whether the charges against him as a teenager are true or not.


Senate dignity

We don’t know how it would have gone. But at least Sam Ervin would have restored a bit of the Senate’s dignity.

But it will all soon be forgotten anyway. Because…while the Kavanaugh spectacle was going on, the US 10-year bond yield rose to a seven-year high of 3.24% — nearly 2% above its bottom in July 2016.

This 2% increase, imposed on $68 trillion of debt, is equal to an extra $1.3 trillion in interest charges — completely offsetting any stimulus that might have come from the tax cut.

To look at it another way, the typical working person who works an average of 33 hours per week earns $26 an hour. His percentage of the total debt is about $500,000.

At today’s interest rate, he will have to work 558 hours — or three and a half weeks (not including taxes) — just to keep up with the interest payments. Clearly, this is impossible…

So the only way the bubble can maintain itself is to claim more of the man’s future.

A bubble never runs out of money — or entertaining distractions. The feds can create as much of both as they want. It runs out of time. And as interest rates rise, it is running out fast.

Tomorrow…we’ll share what we learned in Argentina, a country with 40% inflation and a currency that lost two-thirds of its value in the last 12 months.


Bill Bonner

Daily Wealth

Subscribe now to get our members-only podcast — ‘How to Succeed Financially in a Post-COVID World’. And receive the investor’s newsletter capturing the most decisive financial events that could impact your wealth.

By clicking Subscribe you agree you’ve read and accepted our Privacy Policy. You can cancel at any time.

Since founding Agora Inc. in 1979, Bill Bonner has found success and garnered camaraderie in numerous communities and industries. A man of many talents, his entrepreneurial savvy, unique writings, philanthropic undertakings, and preservationist activities have all been recognized and awarded by some of America’s most respected authorities. Along with Addison Wiggin, his friend and colleague, Bill has written two New York Times best-selling books, Financial Reckoning Day and Empire of Debt. Both works have been critically acclaimed internationally. With political journalist Lila Rajiva, he wrote his third New York Times best-selling book, Mobs, Messiahs and Markets, which offers concrete advice on how to avoid the public spectacle of modern finance.

Wealth Morning Stock Market News, Finance and Investments