Category Corrupt DC Uni-party

Feb 16 2023

JFK, Nixon & Trump


Armstrong Economics Blog/Conspiracy Re-Posted Feb 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Despite the hatred that many pour all over Trump, they really should stop and think for a moment, that they have been subjected to brainwashing. I have stated before that I was invited to a dinner in March of 2020 at Mara largo where I was actually impressed by then-President Trump. He said he wanted to bring the troops home from Afghanistan because he was sick and tired of having to write letters to the parents of solider’s killed over there. He bluntly stated that he had no idea why were there. They were fighting over borders for 1,000 years. “What difference will we make?”

There is a common thread between JFK, Richard Nixon, and Donald Trump – all three stood against the Deep State. The first was assassinated, the second was set up with CIA operatives getting “caught” breaking ton the Watergate building, and the third was probably removed from office by rigged elections and now desperately trying to accuse him of anything to prevent him from running against in 2024.

John Bolton was against withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. Bolton has been a hardnosed Neocon and then lied to the people not disclosing that Trump had a whole team to figure out how to exit Afghanistan that Biden dismissed and then claimed the same end result would have happened under Donald Trump. I really do not know how these people can look at themselves in the mirror.

JFK and Trump were both against war. Both were conveniently removed from office. In the case of Kennedy, they put forth Oswald and linked him to Russia, but then conveniently had him assassinated to prevent any trial when today everyone knows that the CIA was behind it. The recent tapes have revealed that Richard Nixon bluntly said to the head of the CIA, I know who killed John. The CIA used Watergate to discredit Nixon and drive him from office also because he wanted to end the Vietnam War and understood the CIA’s role.

Then Trump wanted to exist in Afghanistan. But Iran shot down an unmanned drone and Bolton wanted Trump to launch an attack on Iran. Trump refused to retaliate for an unmanned drone. The CIA asked Trump to extend the deadline for their release of the Kenndy assassination files until after the election. He agreed, and they knew Trump would lose the election. Biden then granted them the right to withhold the most critical files that expose the real source – the CIA.

The Deep Stated wanted to kill Americans and blame Cuba to justify an invasion. Kennedy rejected that proposal. This, he had to go. How dare he think he can tell the Deep State what to do!

All three presidents posed a serious threat to the Deep State. Forget the hatred of Trump that they have drummed into the heads of so many. Open your eyes. This is biggest that Trump and your hatred blinds you to what is really going on.

Feb 13 2023

Likely A Worthwhile Endeavor – Matt Taibbi Looking for Research Help


Posted originally on the CTH on February 12, 2023 | Sundance 

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi is looking for some additional research assistance [SEE HERE]. Specifically, after going a little deeper on the Twitter Files, Taibbi appears to be recognizing the visibility of the Fourth Branch of Government.  He now needs to package the truth of it, in a way his former tribe will accept.

As a consequence, Taibbi is looking for (1) a reporter or academic with experience researching government contracts, and/or the funding of NGOs or academic research institutions; and (2) an infographics designer, preferably with experience in areas like ecosystem mapping.

Taibbi is a solid and inquisitive research journalist. However, he is still averse to recognizing Chicago Jesus as the originator of the modern issues he is outlining.

The issue of not accepting the Obama network as the structure that underpins the modern political surveillance state is common, even amid the tribe of walkaways from the progressive system.

Give him time, he’ll find see it.

From his current mission as expressed: […] “For decades, our government at least loosely complied with legislation like the Smith-Mundt Act, which prohibits aiming at the domestic population any official propaganda “intended for foreign audiences.” However, gloves came off in recent years.

In a remarkably short time since the end of the Obama presidency, the U.S. government has funded an elaborate network of NGOs and think-tanks whose researchers call themselves independent “disinformation experts.” They describe their posture as defensive — merely “tracking” or “countering” foreign disinformation — but in truth they aggressively court both the domestic news media and platforms like Twitter, often becoming both the sources for news stories and/or the referring authorities for censorship requests.

The end result has been relentless censorship of, and mountains of (often deceptive) state-sponsored propaganda about, legitimate American political activity. In the Twitter Files we see correspondence from state agencies and state-sponsored research entities describing everything from support of the Free Palestine movement to opposition to vaccine passports as illicit foreign propaganda. Some of this messaging devolves into outright smear campaigns, with efforts to denounce the organic #WalkAway hashtag as a Russian “psychological operation” serving as a particularly lurid example. The Hamilton 68 story (about which more is coming) hints at this dynamic.

The irony is the entire field of “disinformation studies” itself has the features of an inorganic astroturfing operation. Disinformation “labs” cast themselves as independent, objective, politically neutral resources, but in a shocking number of cases, their funding comes at least in part from government agencies like the Department of Defense. Far from being neutral, they often have clear mandates to play up foreign and domestic threats while arguing for digital censorship, de-platforming, and other forms of information control.

Worse, messages from these institutions are parroted more or less automatically by our corporate press, which has decided that instead of a network of independent/adversarial newspapers and TV stations, what the country needs is one giant Voice of America, bleating endlessly about “threats to democracy.” I’ve come to believe a sizable percentage of reporters don’t know that their sources are funded by the government, or that they’re repeating government messaging not just occasionally but all the time. The ones who don’t know this truth need to hear it, and the ones who knew all along need to be exposed. This project is about both of those things, too.

Foreign state media is labeled on platforms like Twitter.

I want to put labels on our own propaganda, and need your help to do it.” 

~ Matt Taibbi

If he keeps going…. he will see it.

[Understand Modern Fourth Branch of Govt Here]

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; that system was created by President George W Bush and VP Dick Cheney.  Instead, what they did was take the preexisting system and retool it so the weapons only targeted one side of the political continuum.

The intelligence apparatus does not want their public-private partnership, between government and big tech social media, interfered with.  President Obama steps forth in April 2022 to put an exclamation point in place, saying the public-private partnership he created must control the information.  WATCH:

I cannot emphasize strongly enough; how close this collective demand is to a similar construct in Orwell’s 1984 prediction of “The Ministry of Truth.”  Indeed, if you follow the need for government control of information its logical conclusion, these demands by the U.S. deep state architects are identical.

I also hope readers can see this speech for what it is.  THIS is exactly what we were warning about when the shadows were moving feverously in the past several weeks {GO DEEP}.   The catchphrases “disinformation”, “misinformation” and “malinformation” are being cited by President Obama in that speech.   Where did that lingo come from?  THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY {SEE HERE}

At the top of all critical issues we must understand, share and keep focus on, the issue surrounding the free flow of information is the most critical.

Free speech, social media platforming, user bans, censorship, demonetization, financial targeting of Canadian truckers, Elon Musk purchasing Twitter then reveals the Twitter files, our ability to communicate, the culture war, the digital identity issue, heck, even your ability to read this, all of it, surrounds the central component of information.

This is the big war.  Controlling, labeling, emphasizing, downplaying, removing, information; everything else is downstream from this fight.

While President Obama talked about the dangers of misinformation and disinformation, it was only a week prior when the White House officially admitted to creating misinformation, disinformation and malinformation as part of their strategic campaign against Russia in Ukraine.  NBC news gleefully embraced the strategy {SEE HERE}.

The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has an official agency mission {SEE HERE} to “help the American people understand the scope and scale of Mal, Dis, and Misinformation activities,” and Google/DuckDuckGo/Big Tech have officially aligned with both U.S. government interests promising to target, remove and penalize any entity engaged in Mal, Dis and Misinformation activities.

Putting aside the creation of lies to advance a strategic geopolitical objective, the bigger admission in the U.S. government is that much of the information coming to the American public – from them – is manufactured, false, fabricated and wrong.

Simultaneous to this admission of manufactured lies, the platforms of Big Tech and social media are saying they will target, remove and block any content that contradicts the official government position.  The govt boldly admits they lie, and social media states they will block anyone who refutes those lies.

In the case of Google, the dominating search engine for information over the internet, they state it is an infraction against their policy to espouse a claim “that contradicts official government records.”  Yet, the U.S. government is officially admitting the information they are creating for the government records, is self-admittedly false….. and now in comes DuckDuckGo with the assist.

Not wanting to overinflate the CTH position, but this admitted reality is exactly why we have taken the following position.

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

There are only two elements within the public discussion of information, truth and not truth.

In an era filled with “fact-checkers” and institutional guardians at the gates of Big Tech, let me explain exactly why it is important not to accept the speech rules of the guards.

When you accept the terms “disinformation”, “misinformation” or the newest lingo, “malinformation,” you are beginning to categorize truth and lies in various shades.  You are merging black and white, right and wrong, into various shades of grey.

When your mind works in the grey zone, you are, by direct and factual consequence, saying there is a problem.  You are correct; however, this is where people may make a mistake. That problem is supposed to be there.

It is not a solution to the problem to try and remove the grey simply because it takes too much work to separate the white pixels from the black ones.

You were born with a gift, the greatest gift a loving God could provide.  You were born with a brain and set of natural instincts that are tools to do this pixel separation, use them.

If you define the grey work as a problem you cannot solve on your own, you open the door for others to solve that problem for you.  You begin to abdicate the work, and that’s when trouble can enter.  The sliding scale of Pinocchios is one of the most familiar yet goofy outcomes.

Put more clearly, when you accept the terminology “disinformation”, you accept a problem.  The problem is then the tool by which authorities will step in to make judgements.  Speech, in its most consequential form, is then qualified by others to whom you have sub-contracted your thinking.

When you willingly sub-contract information filters to others, you have lost connection with the raw information.   CTH was founded upon the belief that truth has no agenda, nor does it care about you, your feelings, or your opinion of it.  It just sits there, empirically existing as evidence of information in its most pure form.

The search for truth, in all things, is the mission objective of this assembly.  Often, we don’t like the truth; often, the truth is bitter, cold, challenging and even painful to accept.  However, the truth doesn’t care.  Information in its most raw form is ambivalent to your opinion.  If you struggle to accept these things, that’s when you need grey.  The New York Times is not called the “grey lady” accidentally.

Personally, I am an absorber of information – perhaps on a scale that is unusual.  But I do not discount information from any form until I can put context to it and see if the information makes sense given all the variables present.  When something doesn’t feel right, it’s almost always because it isn’t right.

Often, I find myself struggling in the grey and complex.  It is not unusual to spend days researching, digging, clarifying a situation, only to discover the path to finding the truth is in another direction entirely.   Erasing everything and starting over is frustrating, but it is genuinely the only approach that works; and often finding truth is supposed to be difficult, that’s why it is rewarding.

In the digital information age, we are bombarded with information.  It is easy to be overwhelmed and need to find something or someone who has better skills at separating the black grains from the white ones.  All opinions in this quest should be considered; thus, it is important to allow the free flow of information.

I am not necessarily a speech absolutist.  There is some language that needs to be constrained if we are to participate in a respectful society, with grandma’s rules and knowing the audience.  The CTH has guidelines for comments for this exact reason.  However, those constraints need to be based on a set of inherent values.   When it comes to information it is important to draw a distinction from speech.

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.  Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions, in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used, were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove speech from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

Unfortunately, the collectively aligned group of U.S. Govt, the Intelligence Community and now Big Tech, are saying they will put every roadblock they can muster in your way as you attempt to navigate through the misinformation they control.

Team Obama built the system, and now Team Obama are defending the system.

This also happened in April, 2022, the day before Obama’s speech….

….These are NOT coincidences.

Feb 9 2023

#TwitterFiles Accountability: Former Twitter Execs Face Congress. Plus, Rogan’s “Anti-Semitism” | SYSTEM UPDATE #37


Glenn Greenwald Posted originally on: Feb 8, 7:00 pm EST

Feb 9 2023

Inside Baseball Stuff About the House Oversight Committee and the Twitter Censorship Hearing


Posted originally on the CTH on February 8, 2023 

CTH has never pretended or played the game of pretending, but several people have discussed the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing today on the Twitter censorship issue… and thus, some reminders and clarifications of inside DC politics are needed.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, hereafter called the House Oversight Committee or HOC, has a very specific function in DC circles that apparently too few understand.  Once again, let us be clear while trying to explain decades of false information founded upon arcane legislative outlooks.

This article is specific only to the House Oversight Committee.

Within Washington DC, the HOC has a very specific and unique function.  What Fox News is to corporate conservative punditry, so too is the HOC to the same DC system of pretending.  The House Oversight Committee is the “Chaff and Countermeasures” committee.  The HOC operates for both parties with the same mission.

The House Oversight Committee was/is created by the House legislative leadership to make money for the party in control of the Chair.  When the House Speaker is notified of a DC corruption issue, inside his/her office they will often be heard saying, “give it to oversight.”  The intent of that instruction is to give the issue to the HOC, so they can hold hearings, create soundbites and fundraise from the issue.

Making money for the party in control of the Chair is the primary function of the House Oversight Committee.  The HOC does not exist to create accountability or oversight; the HOC exists to exploit the issue for fundraising and satiate the base voters of the party in control of the Chair.  The HOC presents the illusion of accountability by constructing soundbites and member performances which are then broadcast on television for appearances to the voting audience.  It is essentially theater.

The HOC is a “general oversight’ committee, not a committee of “specific jurisdiction.”  Thus, the HOC is the vehicle where Democrats and Republicans publicly display their political initiatives, frame their narratives and then broadcast them on MSNBC, CNN (Democrats) or FOX NEWS (Republicans).

Depending on the issues at hand, the HOC committee members are generally those performance actors best known to the audience of both parties.  This is not accidental; this is by design.  Again, for emphasis, I am only talking about the HOC, a “generalized oversight” committee. Only this specific committee has this specific mission.

A hot button topic enters the committee ecosphere. Specifically trained staffers and performance artists, uniquely qualified to put on theatrical productions (both parties), are then deployed to assist the representatives in creating the soundbites that hopefully will go viral and assist them with fundraising and opportunities to say, “here’s what we are doing.”   Outlining this construct is not an exhibition in cynicism; this is the reality of what the HOC is designed and created to do.

When you see the HOC performing at their best, you will see lots of soundbites created.

The Chair of the HOC is always part of the House Speaker’s close inner circle.  From that association you will discover by training, by habit, and by consequence, the HOC framework is developed to sustain the process itself as an end result.   The questioning is the sum total of all accountabilities.  The performance is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire.

Oversight, in the HOC framework of narrative creation, has evolved into reveling in the endless process (a fundraising proposition) and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter, and never actually applies accountability toward what might be discovered.  This is why you end up with high blood pressure, frustrated with the questions not asked, and throwing bricks at the screen or monitors when viewing.

The point of HOC hearings is to create what are now described as “viral moments” that can be used to generate money.   The second, and lesser objective, is to give the illusion of accountability while not actually ever holding anyone or anything accountable.  See prior HOC reference points like Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi which outline the latest intent with the Twitter censorship issue.

If you watch the HOC Twitter hearing through the prism of expecting some form of accountability for the violations of the First Amendment, you will be frustrated and disappointed.   However, if you watch the HOC Twitter hearing through the prism of how well the panelists will do at raising money from their performances, then you can evaluate the effectiveness; the proverbial winning and losing.

The HOC is designed by House leadership to perform the same basic function for both Democrats and Republicans.  The HOC committee assignments are selected based on the theatrical skills of each representative.  This is not to say the motives of the members are sullied or impure, it is simply to point out the motive of the committee itself is to generate fundraising from the skillsets of the members on the committee.

Once you fully grasp what the intent of the House Oversight Committee is about, and once you drop the expectation that any accountability in oversight is the intent, then you can watch the performances through the entertainment prism of partisan politics and genuinely enjoy them.  There are, after all, some exceptional soundbites and moments created by the hearings themselves.

The HOC is called the “Chaff and Countermeasures” Committee, because that’s essentially what the committee does.  It gives the appearance of targeting, steering the target to a controlled destination, and then distracting the audience from the outcome of accountability.

If sunlight is achieved, meaning the Mainstream Media cannot ignore the issue as presented and questioned, and if the general public become more familiar with the controversial subject matter or topic at hand, and if the party of the Chair can fundraise from the issue, then the committee has succeeded.  However, if you are looking for something to change as an outcome of any HOC hearing, you will be disappointed.

All of the insiders in Washington DC know this to be true; but, when discussing the HOC specifically, the insiders cannot violate the DC code and make this reality a part of the public consciousness.  To make this operational mission widely understood is to diminish the financial value of it.

Now, let’s ENJOY:

.

.

Feb 9 2023

Details Surface of Biden Administration Deliberately Destroying Nord Stream Pipeline, Then Lying About It Repeatedly


Posted originally on the CTH on February 8, 2023 | Sundance 

One of the things about big lies is the sheer weight they create, and the effort needed to maintain them.  Everyone of reasonably intelligent disposition knew the Russians did not blow up their own Nord Stream gas pipeline last year; they had no motive to do so.  All indications were always that the U.S. government conducted the operation and then obfuscated blame toward Russia.

Investigative journalist Mr. Seymour Hersh now writes a comprehensive outline showcasing just how the Biden operation to destroy Nord Stream was conducted.  [SEE HERE]

[Seymour Hersh] […] “In December of 2021, two months before the first Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, Jake Sullivan convened a meeting of a newly formed task force—men and women from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, and the State and Treasury Departments—and asked for recommendations about how to respond to Putin’s impending invasion.

It would be the first of a series of top-secret meetings, in a secure room on a top floor of the Old Executive Office Building, adjacent to the White House, that was also the home of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB). There was the usual back and forth chatter that eventually led to a crucial preliminary question: Would the recommendation forwarded by the group to the President be reversible—such as another layer of sanctions and currency restrictions—or irreversible—that is, kinetic actions, which could not be undone?

What became clear to participants, according to the source with direct knowledge of the process, is that Sullivan intended for the group to come up with a plan for the destruction of the two Nord Stream pipelines—and that he was delivering on the desires of the President.” (read more)

As the article notes, initially in the planning stage, Joe Biden and his administration were all in for the operation, assuming of course the resulting action -essentially a declaration of war- came with plausible deniability.

What is unclear, despite all the details revealed, is whether in the final decision-making Joe Biden actually had anything to do with it; or whether the dark handlers running his covert administration from the Intel and State Dept., felt they had enough prior approval to just carry out the order without him.

As a reminder, in late September 2022, Joe Biden denied the U.S. involvement….  He lied.

(Via CBS) – […] President Biden called the damage to the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines “a deliberate act of sabotage,” rebuking Russia’s claim that the West was responsible for the explosions. The president said Friday that divers would eventually be sent to the pipelines, which were designed to bring gas from Russia to Europe, to determine what happened. 

“It was a deliberate act of sabotage and the Russians are pumping out disinformation and lies,” Biden said. 

“At the appropriate moment, when things calm down, we’re going to be sending divers down to find out exactly what happened. We don’t know that yet exactly,” he added. (read more)

For the U.S. to deliberately attack the Nord Stream gas pipeline, that is a direct act of war against a sovereign country, Russia.

The coverup of this story is going to make the coverup of all prior Obama/Biden stories pale in comparison.

Feb 6 2023

A Record Number of Americans Say They Are Worse Off Financially Since Joe Biden Took Office


Posted originally on the CTH on February 5, 2023 | Sundance

According to the latest ABC/WaPo polling [Full pdf Here], 41% of Americans say they are worse off financially under Joe Biden.  That is the highest negative response to the question in the 37-year history of ABC polling.

Yet we are supposed to believe voters suffering under the worst financial outlooks in 40-years rewarded Joe Biden just two months ago with support for his Democrat Party and candidates?   Something is just not adding up.

.

[Full Poll Data Here]

Feb 6 2023

Sunday Talks, Cohn and Brennan Talk Gleefully About the Return of the Service Driven Economy Under Biden, Happy with No Wage Growth


Posted originally on the CTH on February 5, 2023 | Sundance

This is one of those interviews where you don’t have to take my word for what is being said, Gary Cohn and Margaret Brennan are gleeful about the January jobs report and the overall return of the U.S. economy to a service driven system with low wages.   Seriously, this is them celebrating out loud.

In order to calm the Wall Street apoplexy about his election victory, President Trump selected Gary Cohn to be an economic advisor early in the administration.  However, it was also no surprise that President Trump did not follow Cohn’s advice, and quickly dispatched him after Cohn protested.  In this interview the worldview of Cohn is typically globalist, multinational and Wall St centric.

Talking about the January jobs report, Cohn literally gets everything wrong from the position of Main Street USA.  Cohn also celebrates what he calls the “renormalization of the new economy.”  Continuing with his thought process Cohn states, “A lot of the jobs that we saw were jobs in the service industry, the service, the industries coming back very strong because we’re starting to see the economy go back to what we historically think of the economy,” he said.  This is exactly how Wall Street, and the multinationals look at the U.S. economy.

The next part that both Cohn and Margaret Brennan celebrate is even more sunlight. “The interesting thing about last month’s unemployment numbers is we brought people back to work, but we did not have to entice them with pay,” Cohn stated. “So, the monthly, the month over month number in wage gains was 30 basis points. The prior month was 40 basis points. So, we’re seeing we’re getting people back into the labor force for a lower wage than we were prior to this,” he said.   With higher prices (inflation) crushing the middle-class and service workers, the multinationals Cohn represents are celebrating that they don’t have to pay workers higher wages.  WATCH:

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: So 517,000 new jobs, but a lot of companies, particularly in tech, are announcing layoffs. So exactly where’s the economy headed?

GARY COHN: So, it’s interesting. We did see the 500,000 plus new jobs, which was quite surprising, I think, to many of us. But I think what we’re actually seeing here is a renormalization of the new economy. A lot of the jobs that we saw were jobs in the service industry, the service, the industries coming back very strong because we’re starting to see the economy go back to what we historically think of the economy. For the first time, we’ve seen occupancy rates in offices in major cities over 50%. When you see occupancy rates go up, you need the service sector to work. Think about people going back into the office. They need parking attendants. They need people to work in the buildings. They need security. They need people to clean the buildings. People stop for coffee when they go into the buildings. They go out to lunch. They go to bars. For the- for that to happen, you need the service sectors to come back to work. So the 120,000 service sector employees that came back to work, that 100% correlates with people going back to what is the new normal. It may not be five days a week in the office, but it’s enough days in the week in the office where you need the service sector to come back to work. The interesting thing about last month’s unemployment numbers is we brought people back to work, but we did not have to entice them with pay. So the monthly, the month over month number in wage gains was 30 basis points. The prior month was 40 basis points. So we’re seeing we’re getting people back into the labor force for a lower wage than we were prior to this.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And that’s a little bit hopeful for you on the inflation front.

GARY COHN: Yeah, and I think this is natural. I think what we’ve seen is, after all the stimulus that was put in the system over the last three months, people are running out of the stimulus money. We saw that in the fourth quarter of last year. We saw consumer spending slow down. We saw debit balances on credit cards go up. We started to see delinquencies go up. And you know what happened? People actually did the right thing and they went back to work. They’re engaged and they reenter the workforce. And I think we saw a lot of that in the January numbers.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So these more positive signs have led Bank of America, for example, to say recession still in the cards, but not until after March. I wonder what your thoughts are on that. And as CEOs warned about borrowing costs going up as a result of the Fed hiking. They are tightening belts. So how far off is this recession?

GARY COHN: Well, we’ve got a couple of phenomena going on. Interest rates have been going up, so borrowing costs have been going up for companies. On the flip side, the dollar has been weakening. So the multinational corporations in the United States who repatriate earnings from offshore, those repatriated earnings have become more valuable. I think the people that have been really worried about a recession in the first and second quarter of this year, I think after what we’ve seen this week with both Chairman Powell’s announcements and the data in unemployment, I think that recession is off the table for Q and one in Q2 of this year. You know, we’re going to get another employment report before the next Fed meeting and we’ll see where the economy’s going. But it does feel like we’re in relatively good shape here. The question is going to be how does the Federal Reserve handle what’s going on in the economy? Are we going to continue to have to increase wages to draw people back in the labor force, or are people coming back in the labor force because they need to? And we’re not going to have wage inflation if that happens. The Federal Reserve is actually in a very good place.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me ask you about something the Fed chair said this week. He said Congress has to lift this debt ceiling. I’m throwing one of the things that could screw up your- your rosy prediction at you. He said no one should assume that the Fed can protect the economy from the consequences of failing to act in a timely manner. He’s warning he’s not making plans for a default. You’re on your own if it happens.

GARY COHN: Yes.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Should there be a plan for the Fed to step in? I mean, I know legally it’s in question here, but I talk to people on Capitol Hill who say Wall Street is not taking this seriously enough. The politics are really bad around the debt ceiling.

GARY COHN: The politics are very bad. You know, the one thing is every American, every American is holding the US government to raise the debt ceiling. The full faith and credit of the US dollar and the US dollar being the reserve currency is imperative to our economic well-being as a country. We ultimately have to get the debt ceiling raised. That said, what’s going on here is not something out of the ordinary. If you look at debt ceiling raises over the last 40 or 50 years, no matter which party is in the minority, about 50% of the time, debt ceiling raises come with some amendments attached- attached to them from the other party. So this is quite an. Normal, the process that we’re going through.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You don’t sound overly concerned.

GARY COHN: Like I’m always concerned when we’re dealing with debt ceiling, but I have a feeling that we will get there in the end when we have no other choice. You had this- you had the speaker here last week and he felt confident that we would get there when we had no other choice. The speaker met with the president of the United States this week. The two of them came out of the meeting relatively confident. I feel they both understand there is no choice. In the end of the day, we have to raise the debt ceiling. The question is, can the Republicans get something in the legislation, attach the debt ceiling legislation that they want that they feel like is a win and the Democrats are willing to give it to? Historically, that is what’s happened numerous times.

MARGARET BRENNAN:  Yeah. And the risk there is real. I want to ask you as well about China. Mark Warner was here with us last week and he said technology competition with China is the biggest issue of our time. He’s worried about things that- like your company does IBM, in terms of quantum computing. Is enough being done to keep America competitive on that front?

GARY COHN: Well, we’re starting you know, if you look at where we’ve been this year, you know, we passed the CHIPS Act in the United States, which, you know, is- is- is something that’s not a normal motion for us in the United States for the federal government to pick and choose–

MARGARET BRENNAN: To subsidize.

GARY COHN: –an industry, and and to subsidize. It really is not a normal action- is an action that, you know, historically I probably not would have been have supportive. I was extremely supportive of the CHIPS Act, we at IBM was extremely supportive of the CHIPS Act. If we learned nothing else from the pandemic, we learned that there are certain goods that are necessity goods for this country to have, and we are overly reliant on places like China. And if we don’t find ways to change the manufacturing system in the supply chain and move it back to the United States where we can take care of ourselves, we have made a catastrophic miscalculation. Chips are one of those areas where we cannot depend on the rest of the world and run our manufacturing business and continue to grow our economy. Pharmaceuticals is another area where we really have to move that industry and that manufacturing back to the United States. So I think we really have to evaluate what are the most crucial and sensitive businesses or industries that we cannot live within the United States. And we’re going to have to make real investments in those here in this country.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’ll keep talking about it with legislators. Have to figure out how to pass some of those laws. We’re going to take a quick break. And when we come back, we’ll be talking with four members of the freshman class and the 118th Congress.

[Transcript link]