Mar 26 2017

The Media Has Always Been Biased?

Armstrong Economics Blog/Media

Re-Posted Mar 26, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Marty; I managed to get a copy of your Greatest Bull Market in History at an auction. You do know they bring $3,000+ I presume? But what stunned me in there is that you wrote how the Wall Street Journal falsely accused Jesse Livermore of trying to influence the presidential election by saying the stock market was going to rally. When it did do what he said, the press refused to quote him again because they were wrong.

They will not quote you yet you have been the only one who has called this bull market from the very bottom. It looks like mainstream media is doing to you what they did to Livermore. History does repeat.

REPLY: You may be right. But that is a good thing. It is better to keep the info in real hands rather than just plastered around for hype. Exclusive is better. The majority would never listen anyway.

Mar 26 2017

The Financial Crisis 1992-1993

Armstrong Economics Blog/BRITAIN

Re-Posted Mar 26, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty, it is well known here in Britain that you advised Thatcher of course, but it was John Major you advised and even wrote what he said during the pound crisis and the Soros attack. Would you ever like to comment on that in public about what really happened during that crisis. The press will never report anything you say. There are those of us who would like to hear from the source.

Thank you for what you do.

ANSWER: For those who do not know, Sir John Major was the Prime Minister of Britain 1990-1997. One of the biggest BS stories is how they blame or credit such events to one person. Each of these market “manipulations” or attacks, are typically characterized with one member of “the Club” taking the front position. In this case it was George Soros. He was given the personal face of that event that broke the pound. It was by no means just Soros. He did not get that trade correct out of thin air. Everyone in the trading community saw it coming. It was similar to the Greek crisis in 2010. Once one member is in trouble, traders look around ans see who is next.

The 1992/1993 collapse of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) was a system introduced by the European Economic Community on March 13th, 1979, to which Thatcher was against. It was part of the European Monetary System (EMS), intended to reduce exchange rate variability and achieve monetary stability in Europe in the aftermath of the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971. Only after the Plaza Accord in 1985, did the EMS prepare for Economic and Monetary Union of Europe which gave birth to the introduction of a single currency, the euro, which took place on January 1st, 1999. The collapse of Bretton Woods, the ERM, and the coming Euro all have the same flawed understanding of economics. Governments think they can by law or regulation nullify their own failures. All three systems could never survive under the socialistic/military establishment for the politicians do whatever they want to sustain power, not to manage the economy in any meaningful manner.

Clearly, the tension within the ERM began to build up from mid-July 1992, concentrating initially on the Italian lira, then on sterling and then on a variety of other currencies. However, what was also overlooked was the fact that July 1992 was also when the Russian Ruble began trading for the first time. Meanwhile, the Bank of China required foreign visitors to China to conduct transactions with Foreign Exchange Certificates that were issued by the Bank of China between 1979 and 1994. Effectively, this was a two-tier monetary system – domestic v international. Following the ERM Crisis, this two-tier system in China was abolished, and all transactions then took place in Renminbi. The entire global foreign exchange system was changing. The biggest mistake people make looking at the British pound crisis of 1992, has been to look at it through a myopic perspective of isolation.

The pressure on the Finnish Markka was so strong at that time it was forced to abandon its peg with the ECU. Italy raised its interest rates to try to support its currency, but still the lira weakened repeatedly. The Bundesbank did not cut its interest rates enough fearing inflation and speculation would continue, which put pressures on other states. It was on September 13th, 1992 when the Italian decision to devalue Italian Lira by 7% took place (other currencies revalue of 3.5%: Lira devalues 3.5%). The pressures on lira led traders to look around and saw that the British pound was also overvalued all relative to Germany.

Hence, the pound sterling became the next target just as did Portugal after Greece in 2010. It was Black Wednesday, September 16th, 1992, when the British Conservative government of John Major was forced to withdraw the pound sterling from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) after it was unable to keep the pound above its agreed lower limit in the ERM. Yes, I was being called during this crisis. The first call from Britain asked me what our model was forecasting. I warned that the pound had to be devalued and that the ERM was collapsing exactly as did Bretton Woods. I was told John Major could not devalue the pound for that was his campaign promise. I thought about the crisis and called back. I wrote down the words to say that he would allow the pound to float and seek its own level. This was slightly different from a devaluation which would have still been a fixed exchange rate peg. Allowing the pound to float would let the market make the decision, rather than the politicians. Therefore, Major did not violate his promise and did not officially devalue the pound – he let it float to seek its own level.

The day after the British crisis ended with effectively withdrawing from ERM, it in turn flipped the pressure back upon Italy. Thus, the following day, the 17th of September 1992, Italy also withdrew from ERM. Once again, attempts to politically fix currencies produced a total and utter failure as was the case with Bretton Woods and of course the more recent Swiss Peg collapse. We will see the same end result with the Euro.

The Deutsche mark was sent to significant highs even against the dollar in September 1992. The foreign exchange markets remained disturbed for the rest of that year, with a renewed outbreak of speculative pressures leading to the abandonment of Sweden’s peg to the ECU, devaluation of both the Portuguese escudo and the Spanish peseta came in November 1992 and the abandonment of Norway’s ECU-peg in December 1992. By January 1993, Ireland witnessed economic pressure due to the sterling devaluation by the UK, and this then compelled Ireland to devalue by 10%. Germany finally reduced its interest rates in February, March and April of 1993, trying to ease the economic pressure within the currencies that had not yet been realigned. The entire crisis of 1992-1994 was a prelude to the ultimate crisis that would hit the euro for similar reasons and Germany’s fear of inflation that would impose austerity on the rest of Europe. It was Germany’s high interest rates in 1992/1993 that broke the back of the ERM.

Indeed, then France presented a problem for the politicians that made clear of their commitment to the ‘franc fort’ policy, that was keeping the franc at its existing parity. France also wanted lower interest rates to relieve the recession, and it appeared willing to challenge the German economic authorities publicly, who were concerned about inflation, so they kept interest rates high out of austerity. On June 18th, the French money market intervention rate was pushed below the German rates. This was received with skepticism in the markets. Consequently, speculative pressures within the ERM continued to build. This time, those pressures turned against the French franc during July 1993. The Banque de France was forced to raise its interest rate to prevent the franc from falling through its ERM lower band. However, the Bundesbank did not lower its discount rate, and massive sales of the French franc, Belgian franc, Danish krone, Spanish peseta and Portuguese escudo took place in response. Once again, Germany’s obsession with the Hyperinflation of the 1920s dictates their response. Today, we have seen the price of German austerity upon the entire economic condition of Europe. While the ERM broke, today there is a full federalized government in Brussels attempting to maintain austerity and the same philosophies that broke the ERM during the 1992/1993 Crisis.

At this point in time, the ERM was in total crisis within Europe. One would think they learned from Bretton Woods, but politicians are blinded by their self-interest, which always comes before that of the people or country. Massive intervention was necessary to keep these currencies just above their ERM floor. On the 2nd of August 1993, the EC monetary officials and finance ministers finally agreed that the ERM bands should be widened from 2.25% to 15% (except for the Dutch-German one). With the wider bands, the system would be less vulnerable to speculation.

At the core of all of this was German’s complete misunderstanding of the Hyperinflation and their attempt to impose austerity upon all of Europe, which is deflationary and anti-economic growth.

The ERM Crisis of 1992/1993, made George Soros famous, yes, but it awakened international hedge fund traders to the currencies markets. Traders then turned to the peripheral markets – Russia next and then South East Asia, which saw its share market peak in January 1994 and bottom in September 1998 (56 months).

Russia Ruble-Y 3-22-2017 It was on October 11th, 1994, when the ruble tumbled in the Moscow interbank market by over 20% against the U.S. dollar. “Black Tuesday” became the first currency crisis in post-communist Russia also caused by politicians. From July 1992, when the ruble first could be legally exchanged for United States dollars, to October 1995, the rate of exchange between the ruble and the dollar declined from 144 rubles per US$1 to around 5,000 per US$1. It was the float of the Ruble in July 1992 that started the shift in global capital flows and currency markets. Politicians, for pride, artificially set the Ruble’s value too high against the dollar reflecting past glories, which was the exact same mistake of the British entering the ERM. Rapid changes in the nominal rate of the Russian economy reflected the overall macroeconomic instability. After the ERM crisis, traders then turned to emerging markets targeting Russia. This was the Black Tuesday with a 27% collapse in the ruble’s value against the dollar. Eventually, in July 1995, the Russian Central Bank announced its intention to maintain the ruble within a band of 4,300 to 4,900 per US$1 through October 1995. They later extended the period to June 1996. They attempted a “crawling band” exchange rate which they introduced to allow the ruble to depreciate gradually through the end of 1996, This led to a further collapse from 5,000 to 6,100.

After the Russian introduction of the “crawling band”, traders turned their attention to the emerging market in Southeast Asia with more concerted force. This eventually manifested in the 1997 Asian Currency Crisis. Then traders turned back to Russia. I have stated many times how I was invited to the IMF dinner put on by Edmond Safra in Washington. I was being pitched then to join “the Club” and buy into Russia for they had the IMF in their pocket. The IMF would continue to guarantee Russian debt so you could buy debt and earn 5 times the amount of interest otherwise. The IMF would eliminate the risk. I said “No way, my computer warned Russia would collapse.”

Ruble 1998 - D Of course, this eventually led to the collapse in 1998, which in turn set in motion the Lehman and Bear Stearns collapse thanks to Long Term Capital Management collapse who lost on the Russian bond market.

It was all set in motion by politicians trying to fix currencies that they cannot fix.

Mar 25 2017

THERE WILL BE THOSE WHO PERISH IN THE NEXT CRISIS, AND THOSE “WHO SURVIVE IN UNDERGROUND LUXURY”

If it does go nuclear more than just a handful of bomb’s few few will survive and the tech will fail in those shelters before the radiations drops to safe levels. Keep in mind the a target might be a Nuclear power plant — 🙂

Mar 24 2017

In Stunning Defeat, House Republicans Abandon Obamacare Repeal Effort

by Tyler Durden

Re-Posted From ZERO HEDGE Mar 24, 2017 3:40 PM

To summarize today’s latest Congressional rollercoaster, the pundits and the White House were wrong, and the online betting markets were right.

Following a day of drama in Congress yesterday, Friday was another nail-biter until the last moment, and after Trump’s Thursday ultimatum failed to yield more “yes” votes, the embattled bill seeking to replace major parts of Obamacare was yanked Friday from the floor of the House.

As a result, Trump suffered a second consecutive blow as opposition from within his own party forced Republican leaders to cancel a vote on healthcare reform for the second time, casting doubt on the president’s ability to deliver on other priorities.

The withdrawal pointed to Trump’s failure to charm republicans in the last minute, raising questions about whether he could unify Republicans behind his pro-growth legislative goals of tax reform and infrastructure spending.

NBC News reported that the President Donald Trump asked House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., to pull the bill. A source told NBC that Ryan during visit to Trump at the White House earlier Friday afternoon had “pleaded to pull” the bill after telling the president that the GOP leaders had failed to convince enough House Republicans to support the bill.

Trump personally told Washington Post reporter Robert Costa about the move to avoid an embarrassing loss in the House during a phone call, Costa tweeted. “We just pulled it,” Trump reportedly said to Costa.

A large number of GOP House members had declared their opposition to the bill since Thursday night. It was the second time in less than 30 hours that Republicans postponed a scheduled House vote on the American Health Care Act. Republicans could afford to lose at most 22 members of their caucus in the vote. But as of Friday afternoon, there were 34 GOP House member publicly opposing the bill.

Ryan visited Donald Trump at the White House at around 1 p.m. to inform him of the shortfall in support.

The second delay was another humiliating setback for GOP leaders and Trump, who had thrown his weight behind the bill.

Trump on Thursday night demanded that the House vote on the plan on Friday, and said he would not agree to change the bill further than he already had in an effort to persuade wavering Republicans to back it.

Shortly after the president drew that line in the sand, GOP leaders amended the bill further to allow states, as opposed to the federal government, to mandate what essential health benefits have to be part of all insurance plans.

But as was the case on Thursday, GOP leaders knew Friday that if the vote occurred as scheduled, the bill would be defeated. The problem those leaders face is not from Democrats, who hold a minority of 193 seats in the House, and who were all expected to vote against the bill.

Ultimately, and this may be the real take home message, the Freedom Caucus demonstrated it is more powerful than Trump as of this moment. Which, incidentally, means it is time to start getting very nervous about the upcoming debt ceiling negotiation, in which the Freedom Caucus will likely get its way.

Finally, with over half a trillion in budget cuts now out of the picture, Trump may be able to proceed to his tax reform, but he will have about $500 billion in potential tax cuts to work with now that repeal of Obamacare is indefinitely delayed.

As for the humiliated Paul Ryan, he just wants to move on… for obvious reasons.

Update 7: Finally, Trump capped off the failed process with the following comments to the press saying, among other things, that the best thing Republcans can do now is simply pursue tax reform while Obamacare implodes naturally.

TRUMP SAYS IN END WOULD’VE BEEN 10 VOTES SHORT, MAYBE CLOSER
TRUMP TO NYT:WHEN OBAMACARE `EXPLODES’ DEMS MAY BE OPEN TO DEAL
TRUMP SAYS BEST THING WE CAN DO IS LET OBAMACARE EXPLODE
TRUMP: WOULD BE `TOTALLY OPEN’ TO DEM HELP ON NEW HEALTH BILL
TRUMP: NOW GOING FOR TAX REFORM, WHICH I’VE ALWAYS LIKED
TRUMP: I’M NOT BETRAYED, I’M DISAPPOINTED, IT WAS IN OUR GRASP
TRUMP: SPEAKER PAUL RYAN WORKED VERY HARD

Update 6: Trump bluffed… and failed, and moments ago House Republicans unable to find enough votes in support of the bill, have pulled today’s vote:

TRUMP ASKED U.S. HOUSE LEADERS TO CANCEL VOTE ON REPUBLICAN HEALTHCARE BILL – HOUSE LEADERSHIP AIDE
TRUMP SAID TO TELL WASH. POST JUST PULLED HEALTH CARE BILL
TRUMP SAYS “WE JUST PULLED IT”- WASHINGTON POST REPORTER IN TWEET
REPUBLICAN LEADERS POSTPONE VOTE ON HEALTHCARE BILL
TRUMP SAID TO TELL WASH. POST `I DON’T BLAME PAUL’ RYAN

Update 5: With the health bill vote set to take place around 4pm, moments ago NBC reported that ahead of the vote the Republican conference will hold a closed-door meeting, perhaps to try and cobble together a last minute deal even as most whip count show at least 30 republicans voting against the deal.

HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO HOLD CLOSED-DOOR MEETING SOON: NBC

* * *

Update 4: After a series of conflicting headlines earlier, CNN is now reporting that Paul Ryan has made the trip to the White House to inform Trump: “We don’t have the votes.”

Update 3: Moments ago new headlines surfaced that Paul Ryan was headed to the White House to brief President Trump on where the Healthcare legislation currently stands. And, in an exact repeat of the mass confusion that dominated the press yesterday, headlines continue to be completely contradictory and only serve to further the chaos.

On the one side, Bloomberg is reporting that GOP leaders are not confident they have the votes with one House aide even admitted that Republican discussions have morphed from trying to whip votes to trying to figure out what to do after the bill fails.

GOP LEADERS NOT CONFIDENT THEY HAVE VOTES TO PASS HEALTH BILL

HOUSE LEADERS MULLING NEXT STEPS IF HEALTH BILL FAILS: AIDE

And Rep. Gohmert tweeted there’s a “good chance vote may be postponed.”

That said, Reuters subsequently released a statement from Rep. Mullin
saying that things are looking up for the late afternoon healthcare
vote.

REP MULLIN: “WE’RE TRENDING YES ON THE VOTE”: RTRS

Meanwhile, The Hill’s latest whip list suggests that the number of Republican ‘no’ votes is actually growing rather than shrinking and currently stands at 34.

In reality, despite all the jawboning, we suspect that no one will really know how this thing is going play out until the votes are counted later today.

Update 2: The House has just passed a procedural vote by a margin of 230 – 194 which now clears the path for 4 hours of floor debate on the healthcare bill which will be followed by a vote later this afternoon on the legislation. Update per The Hill:

Six Republicans voted against the rule, an unusually high number. Lawmakers typically do not break ranks on procedural votes, which are viewed as a referendum on how leadership is managing the floor.

Among the Republicans who voted against the rule were Reps. Justin Amash (Mich.), Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Walter Jones (N.C.). All three voted Thursday night against invoking what is known as “martial law” rule to speed the legislation to the floor.

Lawmakers typically stick with their party on the rules votes even if they plan to vote against the underlying legislation.

The rule stipulates that floor debate on the healthcare legislation will last four hours, with time equally divided between Republicans and Democrats.

That sets up a likely vote around 4 p.m. or 5 p.m.

Vote

Meanwhile, The Hill’s latest whip list still shows around 30 Republicans planning to vote against the bill which is more than the maximum of 22 defections GOP leaders can afford and have the bill still pass.

Finally, we would be remiss if we didn’t share this apparent nervous break down from Rosa DeLauro during the procedural debate:

Update 1: As largely expected, the House Rules Committee has just signed off on the GOP’s ObamaCare repeal plan, with a 9-3 vote, which clears the path for a showdown vote later today. The panel was the bill’s final stop before heading for a floor vote.

As of now, the plan is to begin debate on the healthcare bill at 10AM EST. There is expected to be a 1 hour debate on rules and then 4 hours of general debate which sets the House up for a procedural vote around 11:15 am EST and a final vote expected around 4.45 pm.

* * *

Yesterday was undoubtedly a debacle of a day for Republicans which ultimately culminated with the failure of the Trump administration and Paul Ryan to secure a sufficient number of votes from the House Freedom Caucus to pass their healthcare bill (we covered the chaos here). And after the day of misery, team Trump decided that they would rather not continue the political charade in perpetuity and instead decided to offer conservatives in the House an ultimatum: vote tomorrow (i.e. today) or “I’m done with healthcare.”

Which, of course, would seem to be a negotiating tactic taken directly for The Art of the Deal 101:

Meanwhile, the Associated Press seemed to sum up the gravity of today’s vote the best, referring to it simply as a “gamble with monumental political stakes.”

“In a gamble with monumental political stakes, Republicans set course for a climactic House vote on their health care overhaul after President Donald Trump claimed he was finished negotiating with GOP holdouts and determined to pursue the rest of his agenda, win or lose.”

With all that said, per Fox News, after a few procedural moves, the House will likely vote on Trumpcare sometime in the mid-to-late afternoon with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) predicting that the vote will wrap up by 4:30 or 5 p.m. ET.

As we pointed out yesterday, the TrumpCare vote is the first high-stakes political battle of Trump’s Presidency and pits Trump against the more conservative elements of the Republican Party. For Trump, failure to pass healthcare reform would be a major blow as it was a signature component of his campaign and could signal that he will face an uphill battle against the Freedom Caucus to implement other policy initiatives. For conservatives, they must choose between supporting their party and a bill that has been dubbed “Obamacare-lite” at the risk of alienating powerful conservative funders, like the Koch Brothers and their various Super PACs, which got them elected in the first place.

Meanwhile, “round-the-clock” negotiations continue as the White House and mainstream Republicans attempt to sway some last minute votes.

Meanwhile, Trump met inside the Cabinet room with the Freedom caucus to try and rally conservatives to the cause. He also tweeted, urging supporters to call their representatives to back the bill.

A senior administration official told Fox News after the meeting with Trump and the conservative group that there was a deal in the works, but that it was not yet finalized. A source from the Freedom Caucus later said there wasn’t yet a deal.

“I would say progress is being made, and that progress should be applauded with the efforts by the White House to deliver on a campaign promise, and to lower premiums for every American from coast to coast and in between,” Meadows said. He also called Trump’s involvement “unparalleled in the history of our country.”

And while it’s almost impossible to predict how today’s vote will turn out, Goldman Sachs is pegging the chances of success at 60%.

The House vote on the American Health Care Act (AHCA) has been delayed due to a lack of support. Our subjective odds of passage in the House before the upcoming two-week congressional recess, which begins April 7, are 60%. This is slightly lower than our last estimate, in part because there appears to be somewhat greater-than-expected opposition among centrist Republicans, in addition to the well-known opposition among members of the conservative “Freedom Caucus”

Meanwhile, Trump started his lobbying efforts early on twitter.

So, grab your popcorn and flip on C-SPAN…should be a fun Friday.

Mar 24 2017

Russophobia – Symptom Of US Implosion

by Tyler Durden

Authored by Finian Cunningha, via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

There was a time when Russophobia served as an effective form of population control – used by the American ruling class in particular to command the general US population into patriotic loyalty. Not any longer. Now, Russophobia is a sign of weakness, of desperate implosion among the US ruling class from their own rotten, internal decay.

This propaganda technique worked adequately well during the Cold War decades when the former Soviet Union could be easily demonized as «godless communism» and an «evil empire». Such stereotypes, no matter how false, could be sustained largely because of the monopoly control of Western media by governments and official regulators.

The Soviet Union passed away more than a quarter of a century ago, but Russophobia among the US political class is more virulent than ever.

This week it was evident from Congressional hearings in Washington into alleged Russian interference in US politics that large sections of American government and establishment media are fixated by Russophobia and a belief that Russia is a malign foreign adversary.

However, the power of the Russophobia propaganda technique over the wider population seems to have greatly diminished from its Cold War heyday. This is partly due to more diverse global communications which challenge the previous Western monopoly for controlling narrative and perception. Contemporary Russophobia – demonizing Russian President Vladimir Putin or Russian military forces – does not have the same potency for scaring the Western public. Indeed, due to greater diversity in global news media sources, it is fair to say that «official» Western depictions of Russia as an enemy, for example allegedly about to invade Europe or allegedly interfering in electoral politics, are met with a healthy skepticism – if not ridicule by many Western citizens.

What is increasingly apparent here is a gaping chasm between the political class and the wider public on the matter of Russophobia. This is true for Western countries generally, but especially in the US. The political class – the lawmakers in Washington and the mainstream news media – are frenzied by claims that Russia interfered in the US presidential elections and that Russia has some kind of sinister leverage on the presidency of Donald Trump.

But this frenzy of Russophobia is not reflected among the wider public of ordinary American citizens. Rabid accusations that Russia hacked the computers of Trump’s Democrat rival Hillary Clinton to spread damaging information about her; that this alleged sabotage of American democracy was an «act of war»; that President Trump is guilty of «treason» by «colluding» with a «Russian influence campaign» – all of these sensational claims seem to be only a preoccupation of the privileged political class. Most ordinary Americans, concerned about making a living in a crumbling society, either don’t buy the claims or view them as idle chatter.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov this week dismissed the Congressional hearings into alleged Russian interference in US politics. He aptly said that US lawmakers and the corporate media have become «entangled» in their own fabrications. «They are trying to find evidence for conclusions that they have already made», said Peskov.

Other suitable imagery is that the US political class are tilting at windmills, chasing their own tails, or running from their own shadows. There seems to be a collective delusional mindset.

Unable to accept the reality that the governing structure of the US has lost legitimacy in the eyes of the people, that the people rebelled by electing an outsider in the form of business mogul-turned-politician Donald Trump, that the collapse of American traditional politics is due to the atrophy of its bankrupt capitalist economy over several decades – the ruling class have fabricated their own excuse for demise by blaming it all on Russia.

The American ruling class cannot accept, or come to terms, with the fact of systemic failure in their own political system. The election of Trump is a symptom of this failure and the widespread disillusionment among voters towards the two-party train wreck of Republicans and Democrats. That is why the specter of Russian interference in the US political system had to be conjured up, by necessity, as a way of «explaining» the abject failure and the ensuing popular revolt.

Russophobia was rehabilitated from the Cold War closet by the American political establishment to distract from the glaring internal collapse of American politics.

The corrosive, self-destruction seems to know no bounds. James Comey, the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, told Congress this week that the White House is being probed for illicit contacts with Russia. This dramatic notice served by Comey was greeted with general approval by political opponents of the Trump administration, as well as by news media outlets.

The New York Times said the FBI was in effect holding a «criminal investigation at the doorstep of the White House».

Other news outlets are openly airing discussions on the probability of President Trump being impeached from office.

The toxic political atmosphere of Russophobia in Washington is unprecedented. The Trump administration is being crippled at every turn from conducting normal political business under a toxic cloud of suspicion that it is guilty of treason from colluding with Russia.

President Trump has run afoul with Republicans in Congress over his planned healthcare reforms because many Republicans are taking issue instead over the vaunted Russian probe.

When Trump’s Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was reported to be skipping a NATO summit next month but was planning to visit Moscow later in the same month, the itinerary was interpreted as a sign of untoward Russian influence.

What makes the spectacle of political infighting so unprecedented is that there is such little evidence to back up allegations of Trump-Russia collusion. It is preponderantly based on innuendo and anonymous leaks to the media, which are then recycled as «evidence».

Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said earlier this week that he has seen no actual evidence among classified documents indicating any collusion between the Trump campaign team and the Russian government.

Even former senior intelligence officials, James Clapper and Michael Morell who are no friends of Trump, have lately admitted in media interviews that there is no such evidence.

Yet, FBI chief James Comey told Congress that his agency was pursuing a potentially criminal investigation into the Trump administration, while at the same time not confirming or denying the existence of any evidence.

And, as already noted, this declaration of open-ended snooping by Comey on the White House was met with avid approval by political opponents of Trump, both on Capitol Hill and in the corporate media.

Let’s just assume for a moment that the whole Trump-Russia collusion story is indeed fake. That it is groundless, a figment of imagination. There are solid reasons to believe that is the case. But let’s just assume here that it is fake for the sake of argument.

That then means that the Washington seat of government and the US presidency are tearing themselves apart in a futile civil war.

The real war here is a power struggle within the US in the context of ruling parties no longer having legitimacy to govern.

This is an American implosion. An historic Made-in-America meltdown. And Russophobia is but a symptom of the internal decay at the heart of US politics.