This episode of Fresh Air encouraged a deluge of thoughts and
considerations. Listening to the account by the former US Attorney and his reports
of the corruption in the Trump administration and specifically of former
Attorney General Bill Barr, I could not help but immediately think of LPR's
Issues Etc.
No aspect of the narrative surprised me in the least but as
the reports and evidence continue to mount, can anyone seriously doubt the
corrupt nature of the administration and those within it? And yet Todd Wilken
of Issues Etc. continues to invite the likes of Bill Barr and former Attorney
General Ed Meese on to the show as if they were voices in possession of some
kind of moral authority or integrity – as if Christians should be interested in
what these men have to say, or that they possess some kind of wisdom.
Both of these men (and they are by no means alone among
former AG's) are dirty, criminal players involved in dark deeds, cover-ups, and
other forms of corruption. They make a mockery of both man's and God's laws,
and yet because of their political alignments and their willingness to abuse
their power, they are reckoned heroes.
This is not to suggest 'liberal' or Democratic-affiliated
AG's are any better. This is to miss the point. But these men are cast as
Christians, men in possession of moral authority to speak to issues concerning
the law and ethics. This is what is offensive and demonstrates once again the
lack of discernment among Christian leaders – or their willingness to tickle
ears for the sake of ratings and donations.
As far as Geoffrey Berman, the former US Attorney in the
interview, I must say I was not impressed. He is either subject to a great deal
of self-deception regarding the nature of his office or he's simply lying – not
about Barr and Trump, but about the nature of his office and how it pursues its
mandate.
The Southern District of New York is exceptional and stands out
from other jurisdictions because it deals with Federal cases in Manhattan – in
other words big business, banking, and international affairs. The so-called Sheriff of Wall Street is a stepping
stone to higher office and prestige. It was a launch pad for names like
Stimson, Tuttle, and Dewey in another generation and in more recent years it
has been associated with names such as Louis Freeh and Patrick Fitzgerald, and the
office was captained by the likes of Rudy Giuliani, Mary Jo White, and James
Comey. And while not all go on into politics or seek political appointment, the
position is prestigious and can also lead to powerful and lucrative offers in
the private sector.
The Southern District is a highly charged office and contrary
to Berman the primary concern is not justice but wins – victories that give the
perception of justice being pursued. Cases are weighed on the basis of their
merit to some extent but apart from the strong possibility of conviction, they
are not pursued and can be dropped. Berman has to know this but like his
counterparts in the State Department and other branches of government, there
are a bevy of institutionally-rooted arguments readily available that allow
such figures to justify their conduct, and often their inaction – for the greater
good.
I grew irritated listening to him talk about going after a
Turkish Bank for violating the sanctions on Iran. Terry Gross is of course
interested in the Trump angle but for me this is a point in which the Sheriff of
Wall Street is revealed as a critical agent and enforcer of empire. America
dominates the global financial system and when sanctions are issued, they will
go after or cut out any business or bank that violates the terms. They may be
conducting business in their country and context (and on the side of the world)
and yet suddenly (on the basis that they also do business in the United States)
Washington claims jurisdiction over transactions on the other side of the
world. Needless to say it generates no small degree of ire. Even Western actors
have expressed frustration with this policy and find it to be offensive and
degrading but Washington wields that kind of power – at least for now. This is
one of the threats presented by BRICS and the potential rise of Sino-dominated
order. Rival systems and new options will mean that corporations and countries
can thumb their nose at the US as they can have access to global markets
without having to do so on American terms, without having to navigate the
Washington-Wall Street gauntlet.
I'm sure Berman believes in the US System. Fine, but then
he's all the more the dupe because he saw how quickly and easily that system
can turn on him. And while Trump-era violations and abuses were especially
egregious, they were hardly unique. Like all prosecutorial offices, deals are
cut that are often less than ethical, and hardly just. A degree of corruption
is tolerated and in some instances ignored. And in the case of the Southern
District of New York, there is a political (and even geopolitical) edge to many
of these cases – and indeed successful people within the context of that office
are often rewarded politically with appointments or backing for higher office.
His claims of integrity smell more than a little fishy.
Berman would not agree because the organisation has a culture
in which there are red lines. This is readily granted but the red lines are not
based on ethics but are instead calculated on the basis of other factors – the
state of the law in the courts, politics, economic and foreign policy among other
things. Corruption is normal but because these red lines exist and the law is
ostensibly followed (which itself can be both nebulous and subjective), and as
long as wins are attained – there is the illusion or perception of ethical
integrity even while the reality is something far less. And in many cases the
governing ethic is very simple – the end justifies the means. The difference is
one of restraint fueled by a sense of propriety and tradition. If these are
jettisoned and the consequentialist ethic is unbridled – you get the actions
and ethics of someone like Barr. And yet these lines that Berman appeals to and
rests in, are far from concrete or consistent. This is not to justify Barr but
rather to argue that Berman as the former Sheriff of Wall Street doesn't stand
on as firm of a foundation as he thinks he does.
Terry Gross is fixated on Trump and wants to juxtapose his
corruption and the abuse of law enforcement with the former president's 'Lock
Her Up' attacks on Hillary Clinton. Trump is a fraud and quite dangerous but I
have to take exception to the NPR host's assumption that Clinton is somehow
innocent. She's not, but to add to the confusion the Right's narratives
concerning her are often nonsense. There are legitimate concerns about
Clinton's conduct while Secretary of State but it's not about Benghazi. Was she
running a shadow foreign policy under Obama? There's reason to think so. And
yes, an argument can be made for Deep State policy as Hillary Clinton is part
of a larger network of Establishment figures that transcend an officeholder
like Obama. He more or less now has a place in those circles – even if it's
subordinate to someone like Henry Kissinger or the Clintons.
Hillary has much to answer for but the Trumpite record of
criminality and corruption is quite clear at this point. In addition to his own
Deep State connections on Wall Street and the other ties represented by figures
in his administration, his term was also marked by an attempt to create a
shadow or deep state that sought to operate parallel to mainstream institutions
and manipulate them. Maybe that's part of the problem. People tend to think of
a monolithic all powerful Deep State. The reality is the Deep State is
disunited and as such some people can say it does not exist. They would say
there are centres of power and factions working in unofficial alliance but
because they're not coordinated and there are often rivalries, the concept
itself is erroneous.
But this is not the case. There are figures that are able to
unite these factions and forces and their powers and abilities ebb and flow.
There are alliances and betrayals and yet certain events can all but unite
these forces. It's complicated as most things are. And yet I have no doubt that
even the Federal prosecutor's office for the Southern District of New York is
subject to these influences and can in some circumstances be manipulated.
The interview was interesting but also lacking – penetrating,
but also a bit misleading. The extent of Trump's corruption is wider than most
are able to conceive of and again, what's disturbing is that key figures that
are actually criminals, scam artists, and cut-throat political operatives are
actually venerated within Evangelical circles and reckoned as moral
authorities. And yet such blindness and corruption within Christian circles is
to be expected as the New Testament warns of false prophets and teachers but to
actually witness it and witness how it works is still shocking at times.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.