Global Credit Markets Choking Up

-

The absence of a deal — something that will pump liquidity into the financial system — is choking global credit markets this morning.
I don’t understand why the parties involved can’t produce a legislative package that keeps families in their homes, that keeps the instigators of this mess from walking away with taxpayer dollars, and buys equity in troubled firms rather than just absorbing their mistakes. And that commits to national infrastructure projects to rebuild the nation and to keep those hit hardest in these times working.
The right deal would be easy to do. Paulson knows what it is — but he’s not taking the country there, adding to his share of responsibility for this growing economic debacle.

– Steve Clemons

Comments

34 comments on “Global Credit Markets Choking Up

  1. arthurdecco says:

    One of your best, Mr. Clemons.

    Reply

  2. Tahoe Editor says:

    Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH–o

    Reply

  3. Tahoe Editor says:

    Barney Frank is a lot like Wes Clark: The only thing he had going for him was his support for Hillary. And I don’t think he put himself in peril doing it.
    McCain is taking on the leadership role of his party. What does Obama do while Nancy & Harry plan to capitulate to yet another power grab from the Oval Office? “Call me if you need me — I’m at Debate Camp in Florida.”

    POWERLINE: McCain leads, Obama follows
    The neat thing about a presidential race between two Senators is that voters can make direct comparisons between the candidates that otherwise are not possible. This year, the comparisons work in John McCain’s favor.
    McCain pushed for the “surge” in Iraq. Obama opposed it, saying it wouldn’t work. When it worked, Obama said he knew it would work, but defended his vote anyway.
    Two years ago, McCain warned that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were in serious need of reform and he so-sponsored legislation to reform it. Obama did not support this legislation, which the Democrats blocked. Obama was near the top of the list of recipients of contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, and two executives from these outfits were among his campaign advisors.
    McCain also had the right line on the Russian invasion of Georgia (though this was not a legislative issue). As Rudy Giuliani recounted at the Republican Convention, Obama waffled for a while and eventually adopted McCain’s view. McCain led; Obama followed
    Most recently, McCain figured out that he needed to get back to Washington to engage, and if possible provide leadership in, the momentous issue of the financial sector bailout. While McCain opted to help make something happen, Obama said he could be reached by phone if anything did happen.
    Obama’s position was untenable, so he eventually followed McCain back to Washington.
    Hoping to cover for their “follower” of a presidential candidate, Democrats are claiming that McCain has done more harm than good in the legislative debate. Although this is always a possibility with McCain (and, indeed, just about anyone who is willing to lead), the Democrats’ case is absurd.
    Their argument is that Congress was on the verge of a deal until McCain entered the picture and caused Republican House members to block it. The problems with this script are several. First, there is no evidence that House Republicans were ever on board with any deal. Second, the support of House Republicans is not needed to pass bailout legislation. The Democrats control the House.
    The Democrats counter the second point by saying that a majority of House Dems won’t support a deal unless House Republicans provide “cover.” But this argument raises more problems than it addresses. First, it is a serious condemnation of House Dems (too gutless to do what they think is right, even in the face of a potential economic meltdown). Second it is a serious condemnation of Nancy Pelosi (too ineffective to whip her troops into line even in the face of a potential economic meltdown). Third, it casts serious doubt on the wisdom of the deal that McCain is falsely accused of scuttling. If the deal made sense, House Dems wouldn’t believe they need “cover” from House Republicans.
    Fourth, the “cover” argument shows what a non-factor Obama is in all of this. The Dems complain (preposterously) that McCain has riled up House Republicans or failed to bring them around. Meanwhile, no one seems to be asking why Obama hasn’t helped the House leadership obtain sufficient support from House Dems.
    There’s a reason why this question isn’t being asked. Obama is lightweight from whom leadership is not, and should not, be expected.
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/09/021613.php

    Reply

  4. WigWag says:

    TE, Barney Frank supported Hillary Clinton at great political peril to himself. When Massachusetts icon Ted Kennedy supported Barack Obama, Barney Frank stuck with Hillary. When Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick supported Barack Obama and was joined by John Kerry, Barney Frank stuck with Hillary. When other Hillary Clinton supporters suggested she abandon the Campaign, Barney Frank stuck with her right through the end of June.
    Barney Frank’s district, Brookline, MA is filled with undergraduate and graduate students many if not most of whom supported Obama. Barney Frank stuck with Hillary because he thought it was the right thing to do.
    Had Hillary been nominated she would have been thrilled to call Barney Frank an ally in the search for a solution to this problem.
    There are no perfect politicians. All politicians say dumb things. Bill Clinton did, Hillary Clinton does, Barack Obama does, John McCain does. The same can be said about Barney Frank.
    But Barney Frank is one of the good guys. You’re smart; regardless of who you support for President you should be glad he is working on this.
    Not everything is about the Presidential Campaign. Actually neither Obama nor McCain are particularly relevant to finding a solution. The best thing they can do is stay out of the way.
    As an American who wants your fellow citizens to prosper (as I know you do), you should be glad Barney Frank is on top of all of this.

    Reply

  5. WigWag says:

    “I’m getting a bit worried about the widespread sentiment that this financial crisis is all a crock, like the post-9/11 color-coded terror alerts.”
    Dan Kervick is right to be worried. And unfortunately it is also true that a taxpayer bail out will be necessary to solve the problem.
    It may at first blush sound illogical but it is actually far more progressive to let taxpayers pick up the tab rather than shareholders.
    The tax code is still very progressive with the bottom 40 percent of income earners paying no federal income tax. If taxpayers did have to pick up the tab, 40 percent of Americans will be exempt from the get go.
    On the other hand, without a bail out, shareholders will have to bear the burden. Stocks will plunge and everyone who owns shares will suffer.
    Hypothetically if the stock market drops 50 percent, that means a billionaire with a 500 million equity porfolio would lose $250 million. But s/he would still have $250 million left.
    A small business owner who made good might have a stock portfolio of $30 million. If stocks lost half their value, s/he would still have a portfolio of $15 million.
    But take your average worker who has scrimped and saved; who by being prudent may have amassed $80 thousand in their IRA or 401(k) after 30 years of saving. They need this money in retirement to supplement their social security income. If they don’t have it, they can’t retire. If the stock market declines 50 percent and their $80 thousand becomes $40 thousand they can kiss a comfortable retirement down the drain. They are damaged forever. And all they ever did was work hard and play by the rules.
    It is far more progressive to let the top five percent of income earners who already pay 36 percent of all federal income taxes bear the burden instead of the worker who needs his 401k to retire.
    If necessary, raise the top rate; make tax rates more progressive so top earners pay an even larger percent.
    But this populist cry that the taxpayers shouldn’t pay, is a conservative trick. Democrats and other progressive people shouldn’t fall for it.
    Having the taxpayer bear the brunt of the problem is the progressive thing to do.
    It’s what Roosevelt would have done. He would have saved the system and taxed the rich to pay for it.

    Reply

  6. Bartolo says:

    Chopper: “Don’t forget, Paulson is a conservative.”
    Along with such famous crooks as Chuck Colson, Paulson also worked for Nixon; as Erlichmann’s right hand man. Nice bunch of buddies.

    Reply

  7. leo says:

    Anyone check out that great Doonesbury yet (TE)?

    Reply

  8. Tahoe Editor says:

    Barney Frank, 2003: “These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

    Reply

  9. WigWag says:

    On a side note, Democrats should be thrilled that negotiations on how to make the Paulson plan better are being led by Barney Frank. Barney is one of the smartest, most progressive and clearest thinking member of Congress.
    He has been heroic in his defense of gay rights even when the Republicans had the majority. More pertinent to the current crisis, is the fact that he predicted that a crisis like this might occur months ago, and he has been working on a smart regulatory scheme that could prevent it from happening again for over a year.
    Interestingly, despite his progressive views he is widely respected on the Republican side of the aisle. Republican members of his Committee frequently praise him for taking their point of view and their suggestions seriously.
    Democrats could not ask for a better champion at this time. He would be a terrific SEC chair or even Secretary of the Treasury in an Obama Administration. And if he got an appointment to the Executive Branch, he would be replaced by a Democrat in the House (although ironically, he replaced Margaret Heckler, a liberal Republican). I will be a size two again before Brookline elects another Republican.
    You can count on the fact that any deal signed off on by Barney Frank will be smart and should be supported.

    Reply

  10. Tahoe Editor says:

    *yawn* thanks for the ageism … you’re doing a great job at sinking BO … don’t stop …

    Reply

  11. Walter H says:

    Hey Tahoe, your sad sack old man is hobbling over to the debate in MS visibly shaking in his Depends. The old boy better have an extra pair backstage tonight; he’s a true American embarrassment.

    Reply

  12. Tahoe Editor says:

    Gandy/Colbert was priceless.
    I’m glad you’re all still on Palin watch. Get back to me when she tells a child how to misspell something. I still think you all forget that America had no problem putting Dan Quayle into No. 1 Observatory Circle. She doesn’t have a high bar to jump over.
    Biden Fact Check: No US Diplomats In Tehran
    http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/24/biden-fact-check-no-us-diplomats-in-tehran/
    Colbert & Stewart Mock The Vote
    http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20228603,00.html

    Reply

  13. Linda says:

    Haven’t looked at TWN since yesterday afternoon–spent that and most of the evening with five-year old grandson–and still recommend the stress reduction of getting timeout from computers and news as something we all may need a lot of in coming weeks. It’s a good time to cling to family, friends, and nature.
    Thanks to everyone above for a lot of brilliant comments.
    The only thing I might add is that we also are seeing is the result of years of neglect of our public education. This includs the lack of learning basic math and economics as well as history. Our high school dropout rate is very high, and people don’t even learn enough to understand interest rates-and surely not any critical thinking skills.
    So there is a lot of Main Street support for those maverick Republicans because they play into the anger and fear in this situation fueled by so many talking heads on TV. We had decades starting with Reagan of the public believing what government tells them when it sounds good, i.e., peace, prosperity, go borrow and buy, American exceptionalism, etc.–what they want to hear.
    And then came Bush and the lies about Iraq–so now the public doesn’t believe the government about anything unpleasant to contemplate. It’s very different from 1929 because of all that–much more difficult for any one to bring the country together.
    Furthermore, not one of the political leaders yet has really been able or willing right before an election to tell us the truth, i.e., we are in for several years at a minimum of hard times, no matter what plan is adopted.
    This crisis is happening at the worst possible time in our political cycle, before a Presidential election as well as Congressional elections. The market crash of 1929 actually was in the best political timing with a President in his first year in office and no Congressional election at all.

    Reply

  14. questions says:

    Maybe we all just have the wrong philosopher — we should be thinking Hobbes here. Two emotions working in a Newtonian framework — desire and fear/appetite and aversion. “A perpetuall and restlesse desire of Power after Power, theat ceaseth onely in Death” seems to me to be the word of the day.
    The power Hobbes discusses is that which guarantees survival — there’s never enough because what you have can be taken away. So we gather more and more wealth and power, and we cannot be stopped without a Newtonian force pushing us the other way.
    Regulation, in civil society, is what is supposed to keep us in line. But absent regulation, we
    end up basically back in the state of nature.
    Though Aristotelian virtue is great stuff and he’s on the mark about so much, I don’t think it holds outside of a polity. And I get the feeling that Wall Street is outside the polity, especially when it comes to hedge funds. We should heed Hobbes’s call for a Leviathan.

    Reply

  15. leo says:

    How unsurprising to see TE link to Hillary while praising Palin (who manages to make W seem an impressive intellect)… which reminds me, did anyone see Colbert interview the head of NOW last night, or similarly, today’s Doonesbury?
    http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/

    Reply

  16. Tahoe Editor says:

    Palin is still making more sense to me than Joe Biden: “When the market crashed in 1929, FDR got on the TV and said, ladies & gentlemen, no worries.”
    Let’s Keep People In Their Homes
    By HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122230767702474045.html

    Reply

  17. JohnH says:

    A credit crisis with real interests rates near zero!?! Give me a break! If they need money, let them simply raise interests rates to price in the risk. Let the free market work.
    This smells like a gigantic fraud to me.

    Reply

  18. DonS says:

    Wigwag citing Dan on the hypocrisy of the right-wingers citing their beliefs for inaction — at this time. (political philosophy was my first love in school)
    The theories behind classical liberalism which, of course, is pretty much the opposite of what is colloquially associated with liberalism today, may have been fine for its time. But the Great Depression, and certainly the system that evolved from it, should have shown us that in a modern era and economic structure the individual is not capable of coping with the complexity of a society that has left the “state of nature” so far behind. Yet the wingers would deny that there is a defacto change in society so great that the philosphies that ‘may’ have been apposite before, if only philosophically, are in fact only of curious academic interest now. That is the danger, I think, of extrapolating the philosphy of human nature into the economic and political realms, be it classical liberalism or communism.
    It is cruel and disingenuous for the wingers to stick with their “beliefs” in the face of the realities of changed circumstances. Especially when we have so well nurtured socialism for the rich for so long.

    Reply

  19. WigWag says:

    “There is a core bloc of radical Republicans in the House who are terrified that government intervention in this crisis will mean an end to their destructive and backward philosophy of laissez faire wingnuttery for a generation. They would rather see the American economy fail, and millions of jobs lost, than witness that economy being saved by the government that they despise. In other words, they are terrified by the idea that voters will figure out that activist government sometimes *works*, and so are trying to make sure it fails.”
    This paragraphed penned by Dan Kervick is the single smartest parragraph that I have read in one year of reading the Washington Note.
    Democrats should be repeating it over and over again.
    That’s how you turn Reaganism into a four letter word.

    Reply

  20. DonS says:

    Dan, re fear: I had forgotten that I think you are a philosopher, so thanks for the thoughts! Aristotle can teach us a bunch. I deal with the psychological part of the spectrum and do my own share of thinking about fear as a phenomenon.
    “healthy and rational fear” you say. Now that is the key isn’t it. And, yes, you bet your butt that I personally have real fear of 1) objective consequences of this financial mess and 2)the lack of limits that politicians, epitomized by the Cheney administration, have shown in seeking to manipulate through seeding fear in the populace.
    I am not sure that politicians ought not be chastened in their attempts to negotiate this crisis by the recognition that they have seeded and/or acquiesced one too many times to Bush/Cheney and the whole currency of fear as a means of political control.
    I do not doubt that there will emerge a “package”. If, in its wake there is a ‘fear’ of the consequences that playing ‘fear’ politics has wrought on the populace’ sensitivity to ‘real fear’, that might be a beginning of humility. I’m not holding my breath.
    As to your point that this crisis may be discounted/desensitized like color coded alerts. Well, I don’t think the ‘people’ count for much anyway when it comes to action. Only the power possessing beings, and the media mediation of the flux seems to count for much.
    The dems are on board, and if McCain and the righties seeks to scuttle a deal for political ends, I don’t think they’ll have the votes. (BTW – real fiscal conservatives are being true to their beliefs in opposing a bailout [media calling it a "rescue" now] — who can quarrel with that?)

    Reply

  21. Jeremiah says:

    If the whole economy goes down and economic Depression envelopes the land the People will return to Jesus and the country will rise again for His Greater Glory !
    All Praise Goes to Jesus.

    Reply

  22. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “I’m getting a bit worried about the widespread sentiment that this financial crisis is all a crock….”
    Oh, don’t misinterpret what is going on. The crisis isn’t seen as a “crock”. The “solutions”, and our so called “representatives” ability to find honest solutions is what’s seen as a “crock”.
    Everyone I talk to knows we are in deep shit. But no one believes these lying posturing sacks of shit in Washington can fix it.

    Reply

  23. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Calling Tahoe!!! Calling Tahoe!!!
    Please, Tahoe, I have no trouble understanding Eastern American Bray, so you are coming through loud and clear. But I am having real trouble understanding Palinese.
    Please, would you be so kind as to translate the following for us???
    “That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking with, we’re ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh — it’s got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing, but 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.”

    Reply

  24. Dan Kervick says:

    DonS,
    With regard to the “be very afraid” point, this is a question all of us have to answer for themselves, based on the best information we can get. But personally, I actually am rather afraid. It seems to me we have reached a dangerous point in our society, due to the reckless and abundant fear-mongering of the Bush administration, where people are now so hostile to the very idea of fear that they are numbed to the perception of reality, and incapable of experiencing even healthy and rational fear about genuinely fearsome prospects.
    Now WigWag posted an excellent Roosevelt speech this week. Roosevelt’s genius, in my view, was not that he avoided the recognition of fear, but that he knew how to promote courage and ward off cowardice. He never told people they shouldn’t be afraid of Great Depressions, Nazis and the Japanese Empire. But he helped people respond to their fears in a rational, confident, and even buoyant manner, and neither avoid them or be paralyzed by them.
    Aristotle described the virtue of courage as a mean between the extremes of foolhardiness, on the one hand, and cowardly flight or paralysis on the other. Courage is not the absence of fear; it is the ability to do the right and rational thing in the presence of fear. I’m getting a bit worried about the widespread sentiment that this financial crisis is all a crock, like the post-9/11 color-coded terror alerts.

    Reply

  25. Dan Kervick says:

    WigWag nails this one. McCain should truly be ridden out of town on a rail. He has swooped in to prolong and deepen a dangerous crisis so he can profit from it politically, and has as a result subordinated the welfare of million Americans to the cause of his flailing campaign.
    There is a core bloc of radical Republicans in the House who are terrified that government intervention in this crisis will mean an end to their destructive and backward philosophy of laissez faire wingnuttery for a generation. They would rather see the American economy fail, and millions of jobs lost, than witness that economy being saved by the government that they despise. In other words, they are terrified by the idea that voters will figure out that activist government sometimes *works*, and so are trying to make sure it fails.
    John McCain has decided to give these radicals a shot in the arm and help stall a deal, at least for a day or two, so he can then pose as a Man of the People and rail against the Corrupt Pharisees in “Warshington” and the Greedy Money-changers on Wall Street. He is abetted by Sarah Palin, Warrior Princess of the Knuckle-dragger tribe. This the same kind of banana republic populism that has served third world countries so well for many years.
    The Thursday success of the McCain stunt is creating a global crisis of confidence in the capacity of the American government to act with intelligence and alacrity, even in the face of the most evident emergencies. More jobs and wealth are going to be lost today, and the losses are on John McCain’s head.
    Our government appears to be thoroughly broken: we have a lame duck president whose credibility is so thoroughly impaired that he cannot even organize a bucket brigade to put out a fire. With the flames lapping all around them, many of the people in the neighborhood are saying “I refuse to believe in the existence of this fire. The fire chief is lying and fear-mongering, just like he did after 9/11.”
    Our legislative branch, which has been in a dysfunctional state for decades and is typically incapable of producing any actual legislation, was beginning to look better, and was working quickly to turn a flawed bailout plan into a better bailout plan, and get it passed in a timely manner. But then John Maynard McCain, noted economic genius, decided to rush in to restore the world’s faith in the ineptitude of the US legislative branch.
    Someone needs to put a strip of duct tape over his mouth, tie his hands behind his back, and stuff him in a closet somewhere for the duration of this crisis.
    This is not purely a Republican problem. I have been impressed with the efforts of many Democratic legislators this week, but these legislators have to carry a lot of Democratic voters on the back. And The People haven’t been shining this week. Many have indulged in a week of ill-informed kvetching and foot-stamping, and have slowed down the debate on the shape of the bailout by forcing legislators to include crowd-pleasing populist tidbits in the legislation like an executive salary cap, measures that can easily be put of until next month or even the next administration.
    They also seem to want Congress to overthink the problem and build in all sorts of provisions to insure with absolute 100% certainty in advance that no greedy capitalist banker types manage to turn a profit from the bailout. Why is this needed? It’s impossible to predict in advance which sharks on Wall Street will manage to turn the crisis to their advantage. After we do the bailout and the dust is settled, we can identify who has cleaned up and then tax their asses.
    I disagree with Steve just a bit. It seems to me that the key and sole debate we should be having *right now* is about the shape of the bailout itself. Whether the government should simply buy securities or should buy stakes in the companies that own those securities is part of that debate. How the buy-up will be overseen, managed and regulated is also part of that debate. But discussions about additional needed growth and safety net measures, while very important, are not part of that debate and can be postponed for at least a few weeks as we first try to pass and implement a bailout, and put a floor under the collapse of the financial markets.

    Reply

  26. Steve Clemons says:

    RonRon — accountability is key. You are right.

    Reply

  27. DonS says:

    It’s not like the dems haven’t given every indication that they are willing to give away the ranch for the sake of a settlement.
    After all, on top of the real crisis, Paulson and Bush are doing the “boooooo – be very afraid” dance. And dems are falling right in line because of their particular role in the whole stiniking dance/complicity, and history of caving to Bush whenever he pulls their strings.
    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2008/09/the-dems-have-b.html#more
    But McCain has indeed overreached. Yet man-on-the-street may still be swayed by mavricky Jonhhy-straight talk.

    Reply

  28. Bernard Yablin says:

    My comments were app.not acceptable to you—Have a nice weekend!

    Reply

  29. questions says:

    Re keeping families in their homes — when have Republican ever worried about families or homes? When have they ever been able to let go of “moral hazard” for individuals? When has punishing individuals ever NOT been the goal? It fits in with a world view that allows great suffering for individual people rather than encouraging collective, if coercive, action in the name of a more general good.
    All of those nearly-foreclosed individuals, in this conservative view, should have known better than to take on unmanageable mortgages. Nevermind all the mitigating factors we can list. They can’t be bailed out for they have done wrong…..

    Reply

  30. Punchy says:

    Mr. Clemons wants to know why this cant be done. It’s easy — Republicans. For them, EVERYTHING is politics. Bailing out banks, helping peeps with their mortgage, fixing the necessary problems are all politics. McCain shows up and scuttles the whole damn thing. Why? Politics. Now McCain will float his own proposal, and when Dems reject it, he’ll blame the Dems for everything that goes wrong from here on out.
    The Republicans act like 4th graders. Unreal.

    Reply

  31. chopper says:

    Yeah, I know people are desperate to not politicize this. But sometimes the desire for harmony exceeds objectivity.
    Conservatism is keeping a deal from happening. Conservatives are the ones who are fighting against regulating to keep this from happening again. Conservatives are the ones fighting against the bad mortgage holders getting relief. Conservatives want to keep the golden parachutes for the incompetent executives that created this mess. Conservatives are fighting against regulation that will keep this from happening again.
    Don’t forget, Paulson is a conservative. Conservatives are the ones who want 700 billion of taxpayer money for Wall Street, with no strings attached. Conservatives created this situation, and now conservatives are the ones fighting against solving it where it’s not a complete boondoggle for the wealthy.
    Don’t believe this? Look at the specific ideology of the individuals mucking up the works. Conservatism is once again putting its ideology and greed over the good of the country.

    Reply

  32. RonRon says:

    You just missed out one thing: Jail time for the sharks that fleeced ordinary Americans for billions.

    Reply

  33. WigWag says:

    Difference between LIBOR and Fed Funds at the highest rate in history.
    GE suspending their previously announced share buy back to defend its triple AAA rating in the face of plummeting profit in it’s finance arm.
    The dollar is at a ten year low against the yen.
    It looks like the Asian century may have arrived (with a bang).

    Reply

  34. WigWag says:

    It is hard to understand, but one reason is clear; it’s John McCain. Instead of putting his country first, John McCain has decided to put his campaign first. Instead of helping to find a solution, he’s politicizing the whole thing even more; the risk to the the financial system and economic prosperity be damned.
    His “involvement” isn’t making it easier to find a solution, it’s making it harder to find a solution.
    Whether it’s his choice of Palin or his cynical behavior vis a vis the financial crisis, he’s proven again and again that he cares more about making hail Mary passes to rescue his floundering campaign than in protecting the well being of his country.
    His behavior is deplorable.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *