#EP70 Trump concedes even as Dems try to use Sec 25 to remove him, FB bans Trump & more

Sree Iyer: Namaskar!  Welcome to Episode 70 of Daily Global Insights, I am your host Sree Iyer, today is 8th of January 2021. I am with Sridhar Chityalaji. Sridharji welcome to PGurus Channel.

Sridhar Chityala: Namaskar and Good Morning to all.

Sree Iyer: Sridharji, in the aftermath of what happened on January 6th, the storming of the Capitol building a lot of stuff happened yesterday. Let’s start with that. Let’s go over what are all the different things that happen, for example, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer wanted to have the president removed under section 25. There was also talk about impeachment, the whole slew of actions that Democrats want to do all to try and prevent Trump from signing some, you know things in remaining 14 days. What are your thoughts, Sir?

Sridhar Chityala: Well, my thoughts are as follows, which is, all of a sudden, it is not all of a sudden, President Trump has been the target and all he needed was as is alleged that he instigated an Insurrection. It’s called as President Trump supporters Insurrection against the state. Which is why there was as if he incited the people to march and take over the Capitol Hill, etc. etc. What he actually mentioned is the exact language, I don’t know. Therefore there has been a push and pressure that is exerted on the Republicans in the Senate and the house, there is also a pressure that is exerted on the vice president Mike Pence. So they have applied three different forms of pressure. Number one, The presidential team should persuade and ask him to resign as number one option. Should he choose not to do so, that’s immediate, that should be immediate and Mike Pence should take over for the residual period till January 20th when Mr Biden swore in number one. And that has not gone down well, and you have seen the secretaries resigning because they don’t want to be part of that process, also, they are uncomfortable with what transpired in Capitol Hill on January 6.  The second they said if that is not the case invoke Amendment 25 and remove him saying that he is incompetent to conduct the affairs of being a president. There are still sensitive decisions to be made, so that’s the Second. Both Mike Pence and Lindsey Graham have indicated that there is no possibility for invoking and they have no interest in invoking given the time that is left for completing the current term and the new president taking over. So they don’t seem to have received, the very favourable outcome as a result of that, now, this is per CNN. There was apparently a call made by Nancy Pelosi to the Vice President. She was made to wait for 30 minutes and then the call did not materialize, whether she was calling him for other matters or whether she was calling him for Amendment 25, we don’t know that. It looks like Lindsey Graham I’ve seen in this statement which is to say we are going to apply Amendment 25 he’s fine and I spoke with Mark Meadows and I spoke with the Presidential Council and they all feel comfortable that he can carry on and conduct his activity. Then it comes to impeachment where according to El Mar where they have prepared a draft set of terms Impeaching. So, they are prepared to introduce it but nobody wants to bell that cat. The reasons are it has political consequences. So, therefore, Republicans are saying okay, you can push it but recognize that in-house, the House had the maximum number of people talking about this, you know, the Six States there’s more than a hundred people in the house who are saying we want to discuss the conduct of the elections in the 6 days. So it’s not going to be bipartisan. It is going to be divided. Clearly, there are no votes right now as it stands in the Senate, So, it’s not. So the question there for you is, whosoever takes it up and then it falls apart. There’s a political consequence as a result right because in two years these elections and this thing will nag on. So, the political consequence will prevail over the policy consequence, Which is what they’re trying to push in terms of saying, President Trump has to do this. Now this, by the way, is not something new if we go back Ari Fleischer the former Press Secretary of George Bush has been tweeting on this, which is to say this thing started going back to 2016 when President Trump was elected. There was a campaign launched by the Democrats “not my president” like since then the political bickering has sustained it became the very very way he meant between President Trump on one side and the Democrats on the other side on the President Trump side, you know, his view is that he was being watched, surveillance was put in place, he was being monitored, State Machinery was used in doing that and that’s how saga continued, post his Assumption of Power with Russian interference, all other kinds of inquiries that went on right through his presidency. So there is a lot of bad blood that exists between the two and that seems to have now somehow they want to kind up you know, want to pay for what their perceptive issues are. Now, you can see even in our own PGurus some of the comments, you know he is this and he’s that he doesn’t have this. Look at the end of the day, you know politics comes with a price. You are not going to have somebody standing up and saying you have to receive money to fund people. So you’re going to receive money, the colour of the money is not known. It is just the political system the way it kind of works. When everybody knows. You had a lady come and speak about how generously money was dispensed. In fact, people were saying in Georgia, even if you are a Republican doesn’t matter, you take the money, use the money. This is the kind of construct that exists. To add fuel to the fire Michelle Obama who was the first lady has said the President should be permanently banned on Facebook and Twitter. Permanently ban, not only Facebook and Twitter but to all social platforms. So what has happened is, it’s like target Trump is the first set of activities that have transpired between January 6th and January 8th, whether we will continue from January 8th to January 20th remains to be seen.

Sree Iyer: On that note. I personally feel that Michelle Obama should have not mentioned anything, because you look at all the other ex-presidential spouses. They have maintained a dignified silence including Hillary Clinton who happens to be inactive politics even after Bill Clinton demitted office. She has not said anything about what happened on January 6 or even around these elections, didn’t campaign for Joe Biden and now Obama had also campaigned for Joe Biden even in the Georgia Senate runoff races one questions why is it that this particular team of Michelle and President Barack Obama are doing this? There is a certain Prestige and there is a certain, you know, grandeur associated with the post of the president of the United States and expect even after the person demits the office they are expected to uphold the position, the respect of the position that it demands. I’m sorry. I am in disagreement with what has been happening with this particular ex-presidential couple, but that is just me. I think people should judge if this is appropriate behaviour or not. Let’s move on sir.

The one thing that stood out amongst all these things is that there is a certain hurry in which this whole thing got passed, we talked about Senator asking questions about the Electoral verdict in a different state and this Capitol Hill focus outside was used sort of like an excuse to somehow rush through the whole thing. A couple of things that were still hanging loose which I don’t have any update for, maybe you do. Perhaps, you can help our viewers understand section 230 because that is directly in the middle of all these things now. Suddenly Facebook, Google, Twitter might be looking at mmm. What do you think? What do you think the Democrats are going to do? Will they also try and split us up or are they going to let us do whatever we want now. Where, in my opinion, I could be wrong. Social media wants to have the cake and eat it too. They would like to selectively filter out some people’s messages at the same time they would like to call themselves that platform. I think that choice has to be taken one way or the other. You cannot have both in my opinion that is important because I came across a message by Mark Zuckerberg wearing his justifying why Facebook is banning President Trump. I’m not sure that was the right thing to do but you know, this is just me. This is a free country, under freedom of speech you can well express your views. In fact, a lot of stuff that President Trump said yesterday hasn’t found its way to the MSM, Isn’t it? Perhaps you can touch upon some of the things that he has seen yesterday.

Sridhar Chityala: I think that that’s several questions that you have raised with a position that you have taken. By the way, I endorse your position on this matter because the word that I would use is protocols. There are presidential protocols that one needs to follow. My friends asked me, you know, don’t you think somebody has to behave like a Statesman? I said, there are no Statesmen in politics. The moment Communists and China emerged as the major seats of power the concept is no longer about statesmanship, it is about brinkmanship, the guy who brings the highest is the guy who is perceived to be the winner. So, therefore, there are no protocols. That’s what we are now beginning to this so-called New Normal. The New Normal is you can be retired as a president and get in next day and say I’m going to be fighting any future president who is coming in,  that seems to be the trend that is emerging. Okay, now to get to answer to various questions that you have raised,  I give very specifically to Article 230, China is far ahead in-game for this, China has basically stated you guys are part of CCP. Okay, you have no business to be an arbitrator. So don’t do all this financial and all this stuff Alibaba just go back and run a payment service. That’s about it. Okay. So there is a dress down that is going on of our friend, you know, Jack Ma and he’s still missing where he is being indoctrinated what communist is. So, I don’t know I can only assume that social platforms probably have political aspirations, they’re testing the waters, otherwise, how would you say this is fake news, this is real news. So a lot of my posts yesterday when I put some photographs which are published including in the Washington examiner they call it as Fake. This is a publication which has put Washington examiner also comes from DC. We have Washington Post, but you want to put Washington Post, but you don’t want to put Washington Examiner. So, I think they’re stepping into your territory as they see, maybe who knows that in fact, even Microsoft employees were upset that some of the money went to the Republican party, We gave the money as donations only to go to the Democratic party. So you’re beginning to see in these large corporations some kind of political biases that are emerging which we have not seen before. Okay, so I think many of the news has to be taken with a pinch of salt whether they are interpreted incorrectly or correctly we don’t know. But you hear these kinds of uses flash by so I’m just citing what I hear and but to your question this 230 is about the political kind of aspirations that comes up. Political aspirations that seem n to be emerging.

Now, as far as the other specific question that you have raised is why is this sense of urgency? And I think I’ve answered the protocol part. The sense of urgency is that there seems to be thinking that is developing which is to say that not only President Trump is in power, he has access to a fair amount of intelligence. For example,  Iran, there still seems to be a possibility that Nimitz is still in the high seas so they could be an attack. The second to them which is topmost he can self pardon himself and immune from any activity that took place during his four years. This is propped up as an issue yesterday whether he is going to do it if he has not already done it and what is the Constitutional consequence? Apparently, there is no precedence and the Constitutional framework has a gap in this specific domain and it has to be only interpreted by the Supreme Court should in this issue prop up. So this is the kind of the whole gamut that seems to surround the issue around all these things trying to rush as you ask the question. As far as why Obama and Michelle are so active. I don’t know they’ve been very very active in not only the selection of people and opinions and I think we mentioned that even in Georgia runoffs the email that is printed and distributed for donations had Obama stamp on it where he is pleading and making a case that the Georgia Senate races should be for Democrats to get the progressive agenda. Otherwise, the progressive agenda can be blocked in the Senate. Is this the right course? I don’t think so. But  I agree with you which is to say you step aside, you have done your eight years and you move on.

Sree Iyer: Let’s take a quick look at the things that they did not get debated on January 6th. For example, was there a constitutional violation in the states where the executive and judicial branches exceeded their Authority in the conduct? For example, what happened in Pennsylvania? So what are your thoughts on that?

Sridhar Chityala: Well in my humble view notwithstanding the fact, short of being branded as extreme right or right? I think Jim Jordan and Ted Cruz in my view put a very objective way forward which is we’re not suggesting change anything. We are not suggesting to Mr Pence. Okay, set aside and wait. What we are saying is there’s a constitutional precedent which is 1876. So let us have an independent inquiry comprising of Five Houses, Five Senate and Five Supreme Court judges retired or otherwise and do your six to eight days objective inquiry and determine whether there was the violation of the norms, which is also the foundation of the Texas case to Supreme Court, which is to say we have abided by the Constitution, by not abiding by the Constitution in Pennsylvania, Michigan and in Georgia where a selectively set of rules was framed during the course of the elections or just preceding elections by the executive branch and the judicial branch are we at a disadvantage because we have all followed the legislative framework. This question remains unanswered. There is this other contentious point, people keep on asking this question, all done, all done, all done, votes counted, all votes counted. There’s no fraud. Sorry, there are 74 million people who believe there was a fraud. There are 80 million people who don’t believe there was a fraud. There are a hundred million people sitting outside and making their own judgments or not part of the system, who have no consequences from the outcome of these elections but making throwing pedals which is to say Hey, you know it is done. So the only way you can satisfy 74 million people. This is the point of Jim Jordan and Ted Cruz why not have an inquiry and get it done. All that has happened in states is the recount of the same, the forensic evidence, lots of these things have not been done in an objective manner and are the same people doing it. Drop boxes, changing of the rules, even  Scalia’s setting aside, you know the words that came after November 3rd, it’s all gone. I mean when I say gone, nothing has come out as an outcome from that, so to your point in Pennsylvania, the answer is, if I have to give I’m not a legal guy you have to give prima facie it looks that way, you can come. Which other state has that, was it done in the legislature. In Michigan, you know, they said that there was some kind of a threat so the worst we are certified in the Michigan house with only Democrats inside and Republicans outside that was widely telecast. So all this is kind of you know smothered away and you know, you want to eliminate perceptions for the people like me who is viewing. So what we are claiming is based on visual as well as analytical evidence that is presented. What we are not doing is the Discovery process. This is what the whole debate is why people are preventing an objective Discovery process. Many opinions come from India,  Indians know that there are commissions and commissions and commissions and commissions and inquiries and Supreme Court’s, which kind of constantly do this. So there has been nothing constituted to investigate only when you have a discovery process you can think about reforms. Otherwise, you are firing from the hill on the reforms. So these are the two important things as a result of this Insurrection as is called was dismissed.

Sree Iyer: Let’s take a quick look at what has been happening on what action has been considered on the prosecuting rioters. The current approach seems to be to take informational and video evidence and act on that. What are your thoughts on that? Do you think a formal inquiry into the whole thing where now people are saying that everything was going peacefully until a bus arrived full of people who came out and suddenly there was a lot of action, so this is just anecdotal right? So should there be a formal inquiry in your opinion? What are your thoughts, sir?

Sridhar Chityala: There should be, I’m smiling basically because their Twitter was on fire yesterday. So they said, you know, these all these Trump supporters storming into the building I can put up those photos even on PGurus. So then this video was presented to the security officer plus the police saying hey, come on. Come on. Come on. Come on, you know warmly receiving in a smile is almost like a, you know, traffic police, you know bringing people and people kind of walking casually into this thing. Then is a video which Facebook has banned or when you put it they take out, right inside the parliament, right inside the house so which is namely that it’s a chamber that the guy is asking them to come and you know with his stick basically taking them one set of stairs next set of stairs and so on. I mean, it doesn’t look like these guys was attacking him or anything and then next happens windows breaking and all these kinds of stuff. There’s another video which has been broadcast right from there, which basically is saying, you know, these guys are whispering and I know who they are and what specific actions they need to take. So to me when you look at this is all available. But unfortunately, we have no ability that what selective judgment will be applied in posting this on Facebook. Because all these things are either on Twitter or Facebook. So there’s a whole gamut of stuff that has happened and to your point, unless you do an objective inquiry and find out and basically even the FBI and the Judiciary the judicial officers they say if you have evidence, give us the evidence, if you have videos, give us the videos if you have heard anything and if you can identify somebody, please helps us. So again, it has become a very subjective approach in terms of the data collection and then probably an investigation that follows after that. The first two guys who got arrested, both of them are Trump supporters, and the first guy was carrying a gun. He says I have a license to carry my gun, but he was carrying a gun, you know in the precinct of The Capitol Hill, I’m not going to mention his name. So the story is the guys can research and pick up their name, he is saying, Hey, don’t arrest me. I’m carrying this gun. You know just in case because this is Washington DC we have had problems here before. So only when he uses the gun then he is opposed to. Any way whether they have discharged him or have released him, I don’t know. The second guy seems to have had some scuffle with the police not the security and he was promptly kind of arrested and then he may have said, you know emotions are running high and that kind of stuff and he had no intent to kind of calm etc., So he may also be released.

The first two arrests are in public. They were 55 arrests which were made yesterday the last record that I have seen and you know again, it seems like this is the process the same thing happened in Brett Kavanaugh when he was being a whole bunch of (have to use the word) leftists stormed in and they were objecting to the process and what happened? I don’t know. It’s just done with that away. The same thing happened when President Trump was hosting an event for House and Senate members and when they got out there was gunfire in the white house and temporarily the president had to take shelter and the guy had to be put down. So you have these incidents and the three things it tells us one is the security lacks, number two, there always seems to be now skirmishes in DC and number three we still don’t have a clearly defined process as to why this continues to happen. And then of course in between, we also had the BLM/ Antifa agitations and maybe rioting on the streets.

So, in summary to your Point which is, you know, it’s a long-winded answer that I’ve given with this anecdotal data is, we are in a mess, that’s the story. So, two things. I just want to wrap up one, China is now making a statement, hey, look at this, these are rioters though so, it’s happening in the United States, so, I am justified to apply force,  apply the law to put down this Democratic guy in Hong honk. So, I’m justified. Ok, this is a spokesman but not from the external affairs and then you also have people making banana republic and Mike Pompeo today has released a statement, you guys have to understand what have you what the definition of a banana republic is, this is not a banana republic. This is probably freedom at its extreme so, we allow anything and everything to happen because we are fully Democratic and everybody can see this like there’s no suppression right? Maybe we are at the too much on the on their freedom side. And I think there has to be a better orchestration. Otherwise, this is going to get out of control. That’s just my humble view.

Sree Iyer: Lastly, look at markets while all this is playing out. The markets are still going up even today. The future looks on the positive side. Can you kind off cast a glance on the market before we wind up this program?

Sridhar Chityala:  Yes, sir. The markets are very simple. The markets say we don’t care about any of these things. We only care about money. Okay, the money has come in they expect more money to come. So, three factors are driving the markets first and foremost enormous amount of cash liquidity in the system. Number two, the second, the interest rates being 0 close to zero to 0.25 for the commercial but 0% is interbank. There is enough latitude for businesses to borrow rather than raise capital. It has Capital has dividend and other consequences dilution of equity you borrow. And so the earnings look very good, as earning prospects look very good on the S&P side because S&P cut 500 companies, it’s is on the price-earnings multiple, so that’s number two. Number three is the growth is forecast to be 4.2% by FED and 5%, so, the question is asked how do you guys grow and it’s very interesting data, which we will not in today but, in another show which we have already shared, the amount of savings that households have generated, immediately, let’s not go into segmentation, there are people who are don’t have two million. I’m talking about the households which have got a disposable scent which is pumped into the economy. That is what I’m speaking about, that’s what these people are speaking about as well the guys in the market, right? We are also in the market but, the story is the boat they speaking about in the market is the household savings has increased. So, that is also now being put to work in the economy. So, therefore, they say the prediction is 2021 the US markets will be a bumper year.

And we will have good outcomes. So stay in equities. Ok, I’m not going to predict on bitcoin but stay in equities Bitcoin has gone through the roof, since you asked me that question. It’s now 41,000 or 42000 right now, as we speak, it’s purely because of the institutional money that is coming in but, the markets are expected to be very buoyant and expected to grow somewhere close to 9 to 12 % this year. And again today the markets are up. So, this is the beauty of the US system, the government functions irrespective of the chaos. People society lives irrespective of insurrections that happen around the various cities. The markets and the economy function irrespective of whether the government is dysfunctional or functional.

Sree Iyer: Well, viewers, that brings us to a close for this week. We’ll be back again next Monday bright and early. Thanks for joining us do subscribe to our Channel and do donate to our cause. Sridharji as always, it’s a pleasure to have you with us. Thank you very much, namaskar and we’ll be back next Monday

Sridahr Chityala: Namaskar and thank you.